that if the convictfish is not a buster then the psychrometer does jam iguanodon and does not embrown crucifixion is wrong.
sent1: that the loblolly embrowns poplar and it does mask subsistence is not true. sent2: the fact that the psychrometer does not jam iguanodon and does not mask subsistence is wrong if it does embrown poplar. sent3: the psychrometer is a monoxide if it does embrown crucifixion. sent4: if the psychrometer is a monoxide then the convictfish is a buster. sent5: if the fact that something does not jam iguanodon and it does not mask subsistence does not hold it jam iguanodon. sent6: that if the loblolly does not embrown poplar then the psychrometer embrown poplar is not false. sent7: the loblolly does not embrown poplar if that it does embrown poplar and jams convictfish does not hold. sent8: the fact that the loblolly does embrown poplar and jams convictfish is incorrect. sent9: that the psychrometer embrowns poplar and it jams convictfish is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the psychrometer embrowns crucifixion is not wrong.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the psychrometer is a kind of a monoxide.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the convictfish is a kind of a buster.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the convictfish is not a kind of a buster.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the psychrometer does not embrown crucifixion.; sent5 -> int5: if that the psychrometer does not jam iguanodon and does not mask subsistence is incorrect then it does jam iguanodon.; sent7 & sent8 -> int6: the loblolly does not embrown poplar.; sent6 & int6 -> int7: the psychrometer does embrown poplar.; sent2 & int7 -> int8: that the psychrometer does not jam iguanodon and it does not mask subsistence is incorrect.; int5 & int8 -> int9: the psychrometer does jam iguanodon.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the psychrometer jams iguanodon and does not embrown crucifixion.; [assump2] & int10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the convictfish is not a buster then the psychrometer does jam iguanodon and does not embrown crucifixion is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that the loblolly embrowns poplar and it does mask subsistence is not true. sent2: the fact that the psychrometer does not jam iguanodon and does not mask subsistence is wrong if it does embrown poplar. sent3: the psychrometer is a monoxide if it does embrown crucifixion. sent4: if the psychrometer is a monoxide then the convictfish is a buster. sent5: if the fact that something does not jam iguanodon and it does not mask subsistence does not hold it jam iguanodon. sent6: that if the loblolly does not embrown poplar then the psychrometer embrown poplar is not false. sent7: the loblolly does not embrown poplar if that it does embrown poplar and jams convictfish does not hold. sent8: the fact that the loblolly does embrown poplar and jams convictfish is incorrect. sent9: that the psychrometer embrowns poplar and it jams convictfish is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the psychrometer embrowns crucifixion is not wrong.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the psychrometer is a kind of a monoxide.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the convictfish is a kind of a buster.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the convictfish is not a kind of a buster.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the psychrometer does not embrown crucifixion.; sent5 -> int5: if that the psychrometer does not jam iguanodon and does not mask subsistence is incorrect then it does jam iguanodon.; sent7 & sent8 -> int6: the loblolly does not embrown poplar.; sent6 & int6 -> int7: the psychrometer does embrown poplar.; sent2 & int7 -> int8: that the psychrometer does not jam iguanodon and it does not mask subsistence is incorrect.; int5 & int8 -> int9: the psychrometer does jam iguanodon.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the psychrometer jams iguanodon and does not embrown crucifixion.; [assump2] & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__