the fact that the weaponry is a break but it is not onymous does not hold.
sent1: there is something such that it does coat stoker. sent2: that the nitpicker coats belly and is existent is not correct. sent3: that the nitpicker coats belly but it is nonexistent is not correct if the fact that something coats stoker is not wrong. sent4: the weaponry is a break if the fact that the whalesucker is not onymous hold. sent5: if there is something such that it is existent the nitpicker coats belly and/or it does not coat stoker. sent6: if the weaponry does not coat belly the nitpicker is onymous. sent7: the weaponry is a break. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it does coat belly and is existent is incorrect. sent9: the whalesucker does not break. sent10: if there exists something such that it is existent then that the whalesucker is not onymous is not incorrect. sent11: if something does not coat stoker then the fact that it does break and it is not onymous is not true. sent12: if there exists something such that the fact that it does coat belly and is not existent is not correct the whalesucker is not onymous. sent13: if the whalesucker is not onymous the weaponry breaks but it is not onymous.
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the nitpicker coats belly and is not existent is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it coats belly and is not existent is incorrect.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the whalesucker is not onymous.; sent13 & int3 -> hypothesis;
that the weaponry is a break and is not onymous does not hold.
sent11 -> int4: the fact that the weaponry is a kind of a break but it is non-onymous is false if the fact that it does not coat stoker hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the weaponry is a break but it is not onymous does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it does coat stoker. sent2: that the nitpicker coats belly and is existent is not correct. sent3: that the nitpicker coats belly but it is nonexistent is not correct if the fact that something coats stoker is not wrong. sent4: the weaponry is a break if the fact that the whalesucker is not onymous hold. sent5: if there is something such that it is existent the nitpicker coats belly and/or it does not coat stoker. sent6: if the weaponry does not coat belly the nitpicker is onymous. sent7: the weaponry is a break. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it does coat belly and is existent is incorrect. sent9: the whalesucker does not break. sent10: if there exists something such that it is existent then that the whalesucker is not onymous is not incorrect. sent11: if something does not coat stoker then the fact that it does break and it is not onymous is not true. sent12: if there exists something such that the fact that it does coat belly and is not existent is not correct the whalesucker is not onymous. sent13: if the whalesucker is not onymous the weaponry breaks but it is not onymous. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the nitpicker coats belly and is not existent is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it coats belly and is not existent is incorrect.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the whalesucker is not onymous.; sent13 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__