the ropewalker is not nonwashable.
sent1: there exists something such that it effaces petiolule. sent2: The slipping tins petiolule. sent3: if the petiolule is not a tunnel the ropewalker is not nonwashable. sent4: the petiolule tins slipping. sent5: the petiolule is a kind of a tunnel and is a kind of a partisan. sent6: the ropewalker is nonwashable if there exists something such that the fact that it is not aground or it does not efface petiolule or both is not correct. sent7: that either the lawgiver is not aground or it does not efface petiolule or both is not true if the petiolule does not efface petiolule. sent8: the petiolule does not tin slipping if it does tunnel and it does efface petiolule.
sent5 -> int1: the petiolule is a tunnel.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the petiolule effaces petiolule.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the petiolule tunnels and it does efface petiolule.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the petiolule does not tin slipping.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the petiolule does not efface petiolule hold.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the fact that the lawgiver either is not aground or does not efface petiolule or both does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it is not aground or does not efface petiolule or both is wrong.; int7 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the ropewalker is not nonwashable.
$hypothesis$ = the ropewalker is not nonwashable. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it effaces petiolule. sent2: The slipping tins petiolule. sent3: if the petiolule is not a tunnel the ropewalker is not nonwashable. sent4: the petiolule tins slipping. sent5: the petiolule is a kind of a tunnel and is a kind of a partisan. sent6: the ropewalker is nonwashable if there exists something such that the fact that it is not aground or it does not efface petiolule or both is not correct. sent7: that either the lawgiver is not aground or it does not efface petiolule or both is not true if the petiolule does not efface petiolule. sent8: the petiolule does not tin slipping if it does tunnel and it does efface petiolule. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: the petiolule is a tunnel.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the petiolule effaces petiolule.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the petiolule tunnels and it does efface petiolule.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the petiolule does not tin slipping.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the petiolule does not efface petiolule hold.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the fact that the lawgiver either is not aground or does not efface petiolule or both does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it is not aground or does not efface petiolule or both is wrong.; int7 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__