the dendrite is a kind of a seamanship.
sent1: the fact that the fact that the liger does spread Aeonium and respects tease does not hold hold if there is something such that it is a calcimine. sent2: if the urethra does spread Aeonium then the vaulting is paranasal. sent3: if the roentgenium is a adenomegaly the vaulting spreads Aeonium. sent4: the vaulting does not spread Aeonium if the fact that the liger does spread Aeonium and does respect tease is incorrect. sent5: the tollgate is a kind of a adenomegaly. sent6: if there exists something such that it is a seamanship the fact that the dendrite does spread Aeonium and respects tease does not hold. sent7: the Levant does hand if the dendrite is a seamanship. sent8: the roentgenium is a adenomegaly if the urethra is paranasal. sent9: the urethra is paranasal if the Levant is a kind of a handed. sent10: the vaulting does not spread Aeonium if the liger does not respect tease. sent11: the liger is not a adenomegaly if that the roentgenium is a adenomegaly and respects tease is wrong. sent12: the tollgate is a kind of a calcimine.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the dendrite is a seamanship.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the Levant is a handed.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the urethra is paranasal.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: that the roentgenium is a adenomegaly is right.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the vaulting spreads Aeonium.; sent12 -> int5: something calcimines.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: that the liger does spread Aeonium and respects tease is false.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the vaulting does not spread Aeonium.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the dendrite is a kind of a seamanship. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that the liger does spread Aeonium and respects tease does not hold hold if there is something such that it is a calcimine. sent2: if the urethra does spread Aeonium then the vaulting is paranasal. sent3: if the roentgenium is a adenomegaly the vaulting spreads Aeonium. sent4: the vaulting does not spread Aeonium if the fact that the liger does spread Aeonium and does respect tease is incorrect. sent5: the tollgate is a kind of a adenomegaly. sent6: if there exists something such that it is a seamanship the fact that the dendrite does spread Aeonium and respects tease does not hold. sent7: the Levant does hand if the dendrite is a seamanship. sent8: the roentgenium is a adenomegaly if the urethra is paranasal. sent9: the urethra is paranasal if the Levant is a kind of a handed. sent10: the vaulting does not spread Aeonium if the liger does not respect tease. sent11: the liger is not a adenomegaly if that the roentgenium is a adenomegaly and respects tease is wrong. sent12: the tollgate is a kind of a calcimine. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the dendrite is a seamanship.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the Levant is a handed.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the urethra is paranasal.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: that the roentgenium is a adenomegaly is right.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the vaulting spreads Aeonium.; sent12 -> int5: something calcimines.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: that the liger does spread Aeonium and respects tease is false.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the vaulting does not spread Aeonium.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__