the fact that the fact that the analysand bows dogbane and is not vesicular is not true if the fact that the tonguefish does not bow precedented is not false is wrong.
sent1: the fact that the analysand bows dogbane but it is not vesicular is not correct if the coprolith is not vesicular. sent2: if the tonguefish is not vesicular then the coprolith does bow precedented and is not vesicular. sent3: the fact that the analysand does bow precedented and is not vesicular is wrong if the tonguefish does not bow dogbane. sent4: the frivolity is vesicular if the coprolith bows precedented. sent5: if the analysand does not bow precedented the fact that the fact that the coprolith is a kind of vesicular thing that does not bow dogbane is correct is not correct. sent6: that the tonguefish does bow precedented is not incorrect if the coprolith is vesicular. sent7: if the analysand is vesicular the fact that the coprolith does bow precedented but it does not bow dogbane is false. sent8: the tonguefish does not bow dogbane.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the coprolith is vesicular.; sent6 & assump2 -> int1: the tonguefish bows precedented.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tonguefish does not bow precedented.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the coprolith is not vesicular.; sent1 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the analysand bows dogbane and is not vesicular does not hold.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the frivolity is vesicular.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the analysand bows dogbane and is not vesicular is not true if the fact that the tonguefish does not bow precedented is not false is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the analysand bows dogbane but it is not vesicular is not correct if the coprolith is not vesicular. sent2: if the tonguefish is not vesicular then the coprolith does bow precedented and is not vesicular. sent3: the fact that the analysand does bow precedented and is not vesicular is wrong if the tonguefish does not bow dogbane. sent4: the frivolity is vesicular if the coprolith bows precedented. sent5: if the analysand does not bow precedented the fact that the fact that the coprolith is a kind of vesicular thing that does not bow dogbane is correct is not correct. sent6: that the tonguefish does bow precedented is not incorrect if the coprolith is vesicular. sent7: if the analysand is vesicular the fact that the coprolith does bow precedented but it does not bow dogbane is false. sent8: the tonguefish does not bow dogbane. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the coprolith is vesicular.; sent6 & assump2 -> int1: the tonguefish bows precedented.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tonguefish does not bow precedented.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the coprolith is not vesicular.; sent1 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the analysand bows dogbane and is not vesicular does not hold.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__