the slush is not a Nansen.
sent1: the belching is not surficial if there exists something such that that either it is acapnic or it is a Pellaea or both is false. sent2: everything is a gynophore and it is not epiphytic. sent3: if the screen is not epiphytic then it is not surficial and is not acapnic. sent4: if the screen is not epiphytic it is not surficial. sent5: the screen is not surficial. sent6: if the canonist is not a Nansen the slush is intelligent. sent7: if something is surficial it is imperfect. sent8: if the screen is not surficial and it is not acapnic then the belching is a Pellaea. sent9: if the screen is surficial but not acapnic the belching is a kind of a Pellaea. sent10: the slush is intelligent and it is a Nansen if the canonist is not a Nansen. sent11: the canonist is not a Nansen if the belching is a Pellaea. sent12: everything is a gynophore. sent13: the slush is intelligent. sent14: the screen is a gynophore.
sent2 -> int1: the screen is a gynophore but not epiphytic.; int1 -> int2: the screen is non-epiphytic.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the screen is not surficial and not acapnic.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the belching is a Pellaea.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the canonist is not a Nansen.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the slush is intelligent and it is a Nansen.; int6 -> hypothesis;
the SACEUR is a kind of imperfect thing that is a kind of a Nansen.
sent7 -> int7: if the SACEUR is not non-surficial then the fact that it is imperfect hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the slush is not a Nansen. ; $context$ = sent1: the belching is not surficial if there exists something such that that either it is acapnic or it is a Pellaea or both is false. sent2: everything is a gynophore and it is not epiphytic. sent3: if the screen is not epiphytic then it is not surficial and is not acapnic. sent4: if the screen is not epiphytic it is not surficial. sent5: the screen is not surficial. sent6: if the canonist is not a Nansen the slush is intelligent. sent7: if something is surficial it is imperfect. sent8: if the screen is not surficial and it is not acapnic then the belching is a Pellaea. sent9: if the screen is surficial but not acapnic the belching is a kind of a Pellaea. sent10: the slush is intelligent and it is a Nansen if the canonist is not a Nansen. sent11: the canonist is not a Nansen if the belching is a Pellaea. sent12: everything is a gynophore. sent13: the slush is intelligent. sent14: the screen is a gynophore. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the screen is a gynophore but not epiphytic.; int1 -> int2: the screen is non-epiphytic.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the screen is not surficial and not acapnic.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the belching is a Pellaea.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the canonist is not a Nansen.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the slush is intelligent and it is a Nansen.; int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__