the groundhog is not memberless.
sent1: the fact that the boy is not a brownstone but it is a Delicious is not right. sent2: something does smatter if the fact that it is not a Delicious and it is not a oddness is incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that it is memberless. sent4: the eusporangium parallels. sent5: there exists something such that that it does parallel and it does not smatter is wrong. sent6: if something is not a Delicious it does not investigate cartage. sent7: there exists something such that it does not parallel and it compacts char. sent8: the fact that the boy is a brownstone but it does not investigate cartage is false if there exists something such that it is a Galatians. sent9: something is a kind of a brownstone but it does not investigate cartage if it is not a Delicious. sent10: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a brownstone and does not investigate cartage is wrong then the fact that the utilizer is a Delicious is correct. sent11: that the acetamide is both not a Delicious and not a oddness is false if the utilizer is a Delicious. sent12: the acetamide is unchangeable if the eusporangium parallels. sent13: if something that smatters is unchangeable the fact that the groundhog is memberless is not incorrect. sent14: the fact that something is not a oddness and smatters does not hold if that it is not unchangeable hold. sent15: if the fact that the boy is a kind of a brownstone but it is not a Galatians is wrong then that the groundhog is not memberless is not false. sent16: the fact that if the boy is not a Galatians the fact that the companionway is not old and not parallel is not right is correct. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is a Galatians hold. sent18: something smatters if the fact that it is a kind of a oddness hold.
sent17 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the boy is a kind of a brownstone but it does not investigate cartage does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is a brownstone and it does not investigate cartage is not correct.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the utilizer is a Delicious.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: that the acetamide is not a kind of a Delicious and is not a kind of a oddness is wrong.; sent2 -> int5: if the fact that the acetamide is not a Delicious and it is not a oddness is wrong then it does smatter.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the acetamide smatters.; sent12 & sent4 -> int7: the acetamide is unchangeable.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the acetamide does smatter and is unchangeable.; int8 -> int9: something does smatter and it is unchangeable.; int9 & sent13 -> hypothesis;
that the companionway is not old and is not a kind of a parallel is not correct.
sent9 -> int10: the boy is a kind of a brownstone that does not investigate cartage if it is not a kind of a Delicious.;
$hypothesis$ = the groundhog is not memberless. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the boy is not a brownstone but it is a Delicious is not right. sent2: something does smatter if the fact that it is not a Delicious and it is not a oddness is incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that it is memberless. sent4: the eusporangium parallels. sent5: there exists something such that that it does parallel and it does not smatter is wrong. sent6: if something is not a Delicious it does not investigate cartage. sent7: there exists something such that it does not parallel and it compacts char. sent8: the fact that the boy is a brownstone but it does not investigate cartage is false if there exists something such that it is a Galatians. sent9: something is a kind of a brownstone but it does not investigate cartage if it is not a Delicious. sent10: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a brownstone and does not investigate cartage is wrong then the fact that the utilizer is a Delicious is correct. sent11: that the acetamide is both not a Delicious and not a oddness is false if the utilizer is a Delicious. sent12: the acetamide is unchangeable if the eusporangium parallels. sent13: if something that smatters is unchangeable the fact that the groundhog is memberless is not incorrect. sent14: the fact that something is not a oddness and smatters does not hold if that it is not unchangeable hold. sent15: if the fact that the boy is a kind of a brownstone but it is not a Galatians is wrong then that the groundhog is not memberless is not false. sent16: the fact that if the boy is not a Galatians the fact that the companionway is not old and not parallel is not right is correct. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is a Galatians hold. sent18: something smatters if the fact that it is a kind of a oddness hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the boy is a kind of a brownstone but it does not investigate cartage does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is a brownstone and it does not investigate cartage is not correct.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the utilizer is a Delicious.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: that the acetamide is not a kind of a Delicious and is not a kind of a oddness is wrong.; sent2 -> int5: if the fact that the acetamide is not a Delicious and it is not a oddness is wrong then it does smatter.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the acetamide smatters.; sent12 & sent4 -> int7: the acetamide is unchangeable.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the acetamide does smatter and is unchangeable.; int8 -> int9: something does smatter and it is unchangeable.; int9 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__