the souring is not a lepidolite.
sent1: if that something is not a forward and it is not hydric does not hold then it is not a lepidolite. sent2: there exists something such that it is mousy and it is hydric. sent3: the jerky is not non-efferent if something that is not a marblewood is cacodylic. sent4: something is not hydric if it does not concoct sulfadiazine. sent5: the lager is not a forward. sent6: if the jerky is efferent then the President is mousy. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not hydric the abuser is not a marblewood but it is cacodylic. sent8: that the lager is not photoemissive and does concoct sulfadiazine is not true if it is not a forward. sent9: if the President is mousy the souring is a lepidolite. sent10: if something that is not hydric is photoemissive then the lager is cacodylic. sent11: if that something is not photoemissive and concocts sulfadiazine is false then the fact that it is not hydric is not wrong.
sent8 & sent5 -> int1: that that the lager is not photoemissive but it concocts sulfadiazine is true is not correct.; sent11 -> int2: if that the lager is not photoemissive but it concocts sulfadiazine is not correct it is not hydric.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the lager is not hydric.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it is not hydric.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the abuser is not a marblewood and is cacodylic.; int5 -> int6: something is not a marblewood but it is cacodylic.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the jerky is a kind of an efferent.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the President is mousy.; int8 & sent9 -> hypothesis;
the souring is not a lepidolite.
sent1 -> int9: if the fact that the souring is not forward and not hydric is wrong it is not a lepidolite.;
$hypothesis$ = the souring is not a lepidolite. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not a forward and it is not hydric does not hold then it is not a lepidolite. sent2: there exists something such that it is mousy and it is hydric. sent3: the jerky is not non-efferent if something that is not a marblewood is cacodylic. sent4: something is not hydric if it does not concoct sulfadiazine. sent5: the lager is not a forward. sent6: if the jerky is efferent then the President is mousy. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not hydric the abuser is not a marblewood but it is cacodylic. sent8: that the lager is not photoemissive and does concoct sulfadiazine is not true if it is not a forward. sent9: if the President is mousy the souring is a lepidolite. sent10: if something that is not hydric is photoemissive then the lager is cacodylic. sent11: if that something is not photoemissive and concocts sulfadiazine is false then the fact that it is not hydric is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 & sent5 -> int1: that that the lager is not photoemissive but it concocts sulfadiazine is true is not correct.; sent11 -> int2: if that the lager is not photoemissive but it concocts sulfadiazine is not correct it is not hydric.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the lager is not hydric.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it is not hydric.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the abuser is not a marblewood and is cacodylic.; int5 -> int6: something is not a marblewood but it is cacodylic.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the jerky is a kind of an efferent.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the President is mousy.; int8 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__