the fact that there is something such that if it is multiform it is not a chafed is wrong.
sent1: the stag is satiate. sent2: the jeweler chafes. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a chafed then it is not a recovery. sent4: the stag is a recovery. sent5: something does startle pinkroot if it does not startle enation and is bacteremic. sent6: the arteriole is multiform. sent7: the fact that something is not multiform and it is not Pavlovian is wrong if it is not nonhuman. sent8: if the stag is a kind of an analyst that startles Iresine then the fact that it is a chafed is right. sent9: the stag is not multiform if it is both a recovery and a chafed. sent10: the stag is a kind of a antisyphilitic. sent11: the fact that something is incautious and is evitable is not true if it is not nontechnical. sent12: the chariot does not startle enation and is bacteremic. sent13: if the stag updates dashboard and it is multiform then it is a kind of a biopiracy. sent14: if the fact that that the chariot does not register and it is not a morgue is incorrect is true then the spear is technical. sent15: the stag does chafe if it is multiform. sent16: the cumulonimbus is not a recovery. sent17: if the fact that the stag is not a chafed and is a recovery is incorrect then the enation is a kind of a recovery. sent18: the stag is not a heteroploidy. sent19: if the alehoof is multiform the fact that the stag does not chafe and is a recovery is not true. sent20: if something startles pinkroot then that it is not a register and not a morgue is not right. sent21: the tepal is not cautious if the fact that the spear is not cautious but it is evitable is false. sent22: if the tepal is incautious the vacuole is not nonhuman.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the stag chafes.; sent4 & assump2 -> int1: the stag is a kind of a recovery and it chafes.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the stag is not multiform.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stag is multiform.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int3 -> int4: the stag is not a chafed.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the stag is not a chafed if it is multiform.; int5 -> hypothesis;
the enation is a recovery.
sent7 -> int6: the fact that the vacuole is both not multiform and not Pavlovian is not true if it is not nonhuman.; sent11 -> int7: the fact that the spear is not cautious but it is evitable does not hold if it is not nontechnical.; sent20 -> int8: if the chariot does startle pinkroot then the fact that it is not a register and is not a morgue is false.; sent5 -> int9: the fact that the chariot startles pinkroot if the chariot does not startle enation but it is bacteremic is not false.; int9 & sent12 -> int10: the chariot does startle pinkroot.; int8 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the chariot is not a kind of a register and it is not a morgue is false.; sent14 & int11 -> int12: the spear is not nontechnical.; int7 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the spear is not cautious and not inevitable is incorrect.; sent21 & int13 -> int14: the tepal is not cautious.; sent22 & int14 -> int15: the vacuole is not nonhuman.; int6 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the vacuole is not multiform and it is not Pavlovian is not correct.; int16 -> int17: there is something such that that it is not multiform and is not Pavlovian is false.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is multiform it is not a chafed is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the stag is satiate. sent2: the jeweler chafes. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a chafed then it is not a recovery. sent4: the stag is a recovery. sent5: something does startle pinkroot if it does not startle enation and is bacteremic. sent6: the arteriole is multiform. sent7: the fact that something is not multiform and it is not Pavlovian is wrong if it is not nonhuman. sent8: if the stag is a kind of an analyst that startles Iresine then the fact that it is a chafed is right. sent9: the stag is not multiform if it is both a recovery and a chafed. sent10: the stag is a kind of a antisyphilitic. sent11: the fact that something is incautious and is evitable is not true if it is not nontechnical. sent12: the chariot does not startle enation and is bacteremic. sent13: if the stag updates dashboard and it is multiform then it is a kind of a biopiracy. sent14: if the fact that that the chariot does not register and it is not a morgue is incorrect is true then the spear is technical. sent15: the stag does chafe if it is multiform. sent16: the cumulonimbus is not a recovery. sent17: if the fact that the stag is not a chafed and is a recovery is incorrect then the enation is a kind of a recovery. sent18: the stag is not a heteroploidy. sent19: if the alehoof is multiform the fact that the stag does not chafe and is a recovery is not true. sent20: if something startles pinkroot then that it is not a register and not a morgue is not right. sent21: the tepal is not cautious if the fact that the spear is not cautious but it is evitable is false. sent22: if the tepal is incautious the vacuole is not nonhuman. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the stag chafes.; sent4 & assump2 -> int1: the stag is a kind of a recovery and it chafes.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the stag is not multiform.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stag is multiform.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int3 -> int4: the stag is not a chafed.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the stag is not a chafed if it is multiform.; int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__