the fact that the malcontent is a dare but it is not unhealthful is true.
sent1: the brave is not low-resolution. sent2: the fact that the desideratum is not illegible is true. sent3: if that the malcontent is stimulative but it is not a dare does not hold it is not stimulative. sent4: the desideratum does not wake digitalization. sent5: that the Tagalog does dare and is not crystalline is wrong. sent6: if that the malcontent does wake digitalization and is not unhealthful is not correct the fact that it does not wake digitalization is not wrong. sent7: if the tonguefish is illegible the testator is stimulative. sent8: if the malcontent is a dare but it is not unhealthful then it is not non-low-resolution. sent9: the tonguefish is a kind of a dare. sent10: the testator does not dare. sent11: the testator is low-resolution. sent12: if that something is stimulative thing that is not mandibulate is not true then it is not stimulative. sent13: the tonguefish is illegible if the malcontent is low-resolution. sent14: that the testator wakes digitalization but it is not stimulative is incorrect. sent15: The digitalization does not wake desideratum. sent16: if the fact that the tonguefish is illegible thing that is not mandibulate does not hold it is not illegible. sent17: the tonguefish is not mandibulate. sent18: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not wake digitalization is true the fact that the testator is not non-stimulative but it is not mandibulate is not true. sent19: the tonguefish is not non-low-resolution. sent20: the desideratum wakes Pontiac. sent21: if there exists something such that it is not mandibulate then the fact that that the testator is a kind of unhealthful thing that is not low-resolution does not hold hold. sent22: the fact that the testator is unhealthful thing that is not mandibulate is false. sent23: the desideratum is not stimulative.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the malcontent is a kind of a dare that is not unhealthful.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the malcontent is low-resolution.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the tonguefish is illegible.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the fact that the testator is not stimulative is not correct.; sent12 -> int4: the testator is not stimulative if that it is stimulative and it is not mandibulate is not true.; sent4 -> int5: there is something such that it does not wake digitalization.; int5 & sent18 -> int6: the fact that the testator is stimulative but not mandibulate is not true.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the testator is not stimulative.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the malcontent is a dare but it is not unhealthful is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the brave is not low-resolution. sent2: the fact that the desideratum is not illegible is true. sent3: if that the malcontent is stimulative but it is not a dare does not hold it is not stimulative. sent4: the desideratum does not wake digitalization. sent5: that the Tagalog does dare and is not crystalline is wrong. sent6: if that the malcontent does wake digitalization and is not unhealthful is not correct the fact that it does not wake digitalization is not wrong. sent7: if the tonguefish is illegible the testator is stimulative. sent8: if the malcontent is a dare but it is not unhealthful then it is not non-low-resolution. sent9: the tonguefish is a kind of a dare. sent10: the testator does not dare. sent11: the testator is low-resolution. sent12: if that something is stimulative thing that is not mandibulate is not true then it is not stimulative. sent13: the tonguefish is illegible if the malcontent is low-resolution. sent14: that the testator wakes digitalization but it is not stimulative is incorrect. sent15: The digitalization does not wake desideratum. sent16: if the fact that the tonguefish is illegible thing that is not mandibulate does not hold it is not illegible. sent17: the tonguefish is not mandibulate. sent18: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not wake digitalization is true the fact that the testator is not non-stimulative but it is not mandibulate is not true. sent19: the tonguefish is not non-low-resolution. sent20: the desideratum wakes Pontiac. sent21: if there exists something such that it is not mandibulate then the fact that that the testator is a kind of unhealthful thing that is not low-resolution does not hold hold. sent22: the fact that the testator is unhealthful thing that is not mandibulate is false. sent23: the desideratum is not stimulative. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the malcontent is a kind of a dare that is not unhealthful.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the malcontent is low-resolution.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the tonguefish is illegible.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the fact that the testator is not stimulative is not correct.; sent12 -> int4: the testator is not stimulative if that it is stimulative and it is not mandibulate is not true.; sent4 -> int5: there is something such that it does not wake digitalization.; int5 & sent18 -> int6: the fact that the testator is stimulative but not mandibulate is not true.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the testator is not stimulative.; int3 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__