the fact that the eyepiece is tearless is not false.
sent1: the eyepiece is a libertarianism. sent2: something that does glaze Liechtensteiner is a kind of non-tearless thing that is not unopposable. sent3: the antimalarial synchronizes. sent4: if something is not unsensational then the fact that it glazes counterdemonstration and does not glaze Liechtensteiner does not hold. sent5: the eyepiece is not unsensational if it is editorial a libertarianism. sent6: if something does not synchronize then that it ogles bootlegging and/or it is not tearless is true. sent7: something is not tearless if either it does ogle bootlegging or it is not tearless or both. sent8: if there is something such that it is unopposable then the eyepiece is tearless. sent9: the eyepiece is editorial. sent10: the antimalarial does persist and/or it is a monosyllable. sent11: the antimalarial ogles bootlegging and synchronizes. sent12: the sorcerer does not ogle bootlegging if there are opposable things. sent13: something synchronizes and it is anti-semitic if it does not ogle bootlegging. sent14: if the fact that the antimalarial glazes Liechtensteiner and it is unopposable hold then the eyepiece does not synchronize. sent15: if there is something such that that it glazes counterdemonstration and does not glaze Liechtensteiner is wrong then the antimalarial does glaze Liechtensteiner. sent16: if there exists something such that it either ogles bootlegging or is unopposable or both that the eyepiece is tearless hold.
sent11 -> int1: the antimalarial does ogle bootlegging.; int1 -> int2: the antimalarial does ogle bootlegging and/or is unopposable.; int2 -> int3: something does ogle bootlegging and/or it is unopposable.; int3 & sent16 -> hypothesis;
the eyepiece is not tearless.
sent7 -> int4: if the eyepiece ogles bootlegging and/or is not tearless it is not tearless.; sent6 -> int5: the eyepiece does ogle bootlegging or it is not tearless or both if it does not synchronize.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the eyepiece is tearless is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the eyepiece is a libertarianism. sent2: something that does glaze Liechtensteiner is a kind of non-tearless thing that is not unopposable. sent3: the antimalarial synchronizes. sent4: if something is not unsensational then the fact that it glazes counterdemonstration and does not glaze Liechtensteiner does not hold. sent5: the eyepiece is not unsensational if it is editorial a libertarianism. sent6: if something does not synchronize then that it ogles bootlegging and/or it is not tearless is true. sent7: something is not tearless if either it does ogle bootlegging or it is not tearless or both. sent8: if there is something such that it is unopposable then the eyepiece is tearless. sent9: the eyepiece is editorial. sent10: the antimalarial does persist and/or it is a monosyllable. sent11: the antimalarial ogles bootlegging and synchronizes. sent12: the sorcerer does not ogle bootlegging if there are opposable things. sent13: something synchronizes and it is anti-semitic if it does not ogle bootlegging. sent14: if the fact that the antimalarial glazes Liechtensteiner and it is unopposable hold then the eyepiece does not synchronize. sent15: if there is something such that that it glazes counterdemonstration and does not glaze Liechtensteiner is wrong then the antimalarial does glaze Liechtensteiner. sent16: if there exists something such that it either ogles bootlegging or is unopposable or both that the eyepiece is tearless hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> int1: the antimalarial does ogle bootlegging.; int1 -> int2: the antimalarial does ogle bootlegging and/or is unopposable.; int2 -> int3: something does ogle bootlegging and/or it is unopposable.; int3 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__