the personal victuals and it is pluralistic.
sent1: the hoe is not measurable. sent2: that the fact that the personal does victual and it is pluralistic is incorrect is not wrong if the rosilla is not pluralistic. sent3: the digestive is a kind of a Wampanoag. sent4: there exists something such that it does fumble treadmill. sent5: the aging is a kind of monometallic thing that mints Skagway. sent6: if the hoe is not measurable it is non-downmarket and exoteric. sent7: if the digestive does not mint animal the personal fumbles treadmill and is a nineteen. sent8: there exists something such that it is a nineteen. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not downmarket and it is exoteric the rosilla is not a map-reader. sent10: if that the rosilla does not victual but it is a Rana is not correct the personal does victual. sent11: the digestive is pharyngeal thing that is a Wampanoag. sent12: if something is not a IT then that it is not dorsal and is aeromechanic does not hold. sent13: if the fact that the experimenter is pharyngeal is right then the fact that it is uncousinly is correct. sent14: if the digestive is pharyngeal then the fact that the experimenter does not fumble treadmill is incorrect. sent15: if that the experimenter is not dorsal but aeromechanic is false the fact that the digestive does not mint animal hold. sent16: the rosilla is not pluralistic if something fumbles treadmill and it is a nineteen. sent17: the experimenter does mint animal and it is aeromechanic. sent18: if something mints animal then it is a kind of a nineteen. sent19: something is pluralistic if it is pharyngeal and it is not a Wampanoag. sent20: if the aging mints Skagway but it is not a kind of a IT then the experimenter is not a IT. sent21: that something does not victual but it is a kind of a Rana is wrong if it is not a map-reader. sent22: that the experimenter is pluralistic a nineteen does not hold.
sent11 -> int1: the fact that the digestive is pharyngeal hold.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the experimenter does fumble treadmill.; sent18 -> int3: if the experimenter does mint animal it is a nineteen.; sent17 -> int4: the experimenter does mint animal.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the experimenter is a nineteen.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the experimenter does fumble treadmill and it is a nineteen.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it does fumble treadmill and it is a kind of a nineteen.; int7 & sent16 -> int8: the rosilla is not pluralistic.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the personal victuals and is pluralistic.
sent21 -> int9: the fact that the rosilla does not victual but it is a Rana is wrong if it is not a map-reader.; sent6 & sent1 -> int10: the hoe is not downmarket but it is exoteric.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it is not downmarket and is exoteric.; int11 & sent9 -> int12: the rosilla is not a kind of a map-reader.; int9 & int12 -> int13: that the rosilla does not victual but it is a Rana is wrong.; sent10 & int13 -> int14: the personal victuals.; sent19 -> int15: the personal is pluralistic if it is pharyngeal and it is not a kind of a Wampanoag.; sent12 -> int16: if the experimenter is not a IT the fact that it is not dorsal and it is aeromechanic is incorrect.; sent5 -> int17: the aging mints Skagway.;
$hypothesis$ = the personal victuals and it is pluralistic. ; $context$ = sent1: the hoe is not measurable. sent2: that the fact that the personal does victual and it is pluralistic is incorrect is not wrong if the rosilla is not pluralistic. sent3: the digestive is a kind of a Wampanoag. sent4: there exists something such that it does fumble treadmill. sent5: the aging is a kind of monometallic thing that mints Skagway. sent6: if the hoe is not measurable it is non-downmarket and exoteric. sent7: if the digestive does not mint animal the personal fumbles treadmill and is a nineteen. sent8: there exists something such that it is a nineteen. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not downmarket and it is exoteric the rosilla is not a map-reader. sent10: if that the rosilla does not victual but it is a Rana is not correct the personal does victual. sent11: the digestive is pharyngeal thing that is a Wampanoag. sent12: if something is not a IT then that it is not dorsal and is aeromechanic does not hold. sent13: if the fact that the experimenter is pharyngeal is right then the fact that it is uncousinly is correct. sent14: if the digestive is pharyngeal then the fact that the experimenter does not fumble treadmill is incorrect. sent15: if that the experimenter is not dorsal but aeromechanic is false the fact that the digestive does not mint animal hold. sent16: the rosilla is not pluralistic if something fumbles treadmill and it is a nineteen. sent17: the experimenter does mint animal and it is aeromechanic. sent18: if something mints animal then it is a kind of a nineteen. sent19: something is pluralistic if it is pharyngeal and it is not a Wampanoag. sent20: if the aging mints Skagway but it is not a kind of a IT then the experimenter is not a IT. sent21: that something does not victual but it is a kind of a Rana is wrong if it is not a map-reader. sent22: that the experimenter is pluralistic a nineteen does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> int1: the fact that the digestive is pharyngeal hold.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the experimenter does fumble treadmill.; sent18 -> int3: if the experimenter does mint animal it is a nineteen.; sent17 -> int4: the experimenter does mint animal.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the experimenter is a nineteen.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the experimenter does fumble treadmill and it is a nineteen.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it does fumble treadmill and it is a kind of a nineteen.; int7 & sent16 -> int8: the rosilla is not pluralistic.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__