the bassoon is not a kind of an indulgence.
sent1: if there are non-greater things then the hazard is prismatic and is participial. sent2: that something is non-greater thing that is prismatic does not hold if it is not participial. sent3: something is not intelligent. sent4: there exists something such that it is prismatic. sent5: if something is not cranial the exegete is intelligent and it is a kind of a Foster. sent6: if that the hazard is intelligent is not false then the clearing is not a kind of a Foster. sent7: the clearing is not an excitation. sent8: the Tabasco is participial and it does protuberate. sent9: the fact that something is not greater but it is an indulgence is not correct if it is prismatic. sent10: the fact that the exegete is not cranial and is not wary does not hold if something is not a Foster. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it is non-greater is correct. sent12: if there exists something such that it does not immobilize then the clearing is a Foster and a props. sent13: the fact that the bassoon is an indulgence if there is something such that the fact that it is non-cranial thing that is not wary is wrong hold. sent14: the hazard is an indulgence if there exists something such that the fact that it is not intelligent and is not participial is not correct. sent15: if the hazard is participial and/or it is intelligent the fact that the clearing is not a kind of a Foster is not false. sent16: that the exegete is cranial but it is not wary is false. sent17: the clearing is a kind of a dish. sent18: the fact that the exegete is not cranial but it is wary is wrong. sent19: the hazard is greater. sent20: the fact that either the exegete is cranial or it is an indulgence or both is not false.
sent11 & sent1 -> int1: the hazard is prismatic and it is participial.; int1 -> int2: the hazard is participial.; int2 -> int3: the hazard is participial and/or it is intelligent.; int3 & sent15 -> int4: the clearing is not a Foster.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Foster.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the exegete is not cranial and it is unwary is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it is not cranial and is not wary is wrong.; int7 & sent13 -> hypothesis;
the bassoon is not an indulgence.
sent9 -> int8: the fact that the hazard is not greater but it is an indulgence does not hold if it is prismatic.;
$hypothesis$ = the bassoon is not a kind of an indulgence. ; $context$ = sent1: if there are non-greater things then the hazard is prismatic and is participial. sent2: that something is non-greater thing that is prismatic does not hold if it is not participial. sent3: something is not intelligent. sent4: there exists something such that it is prismatic. sent5: if something is not cranial the exegete is intelligent and it is a kind of a Foster. sent6: if that the hazard is intelligent is not false then the clearing is not a kind of a Foster. sent7: the clearing is not an excitation. sent8: the Tabasco is participial and it does protuberate. sent9: the fact that something is not greater but it is an indulgence is not correct if it is prismatic. sent10: the fact that the exegete is not cranial and is not wary does not hold if something is not a Foster. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it is non-greater is correct. sent12: if there exists something such that it does not immobilize then the clearing is a Foster and a props. sent13: the fact that the bassoon is an indulgence if there is something such that the fact that it is non-cranial thing that is not wary is wrong hold. sent14: the hazard is an indulgence if there exists something such that the fact that it is not intelligent and is not participial is not correct. sent15: if the hazard is participial and/or it is intelligent the fact that the clearing is not a kind of a Foster is not false. sent16: that the exegete is cranial but it is not wary is false. sent17: the clearing is a kind of a dish. sent18: the fact that the exegete is not cranial but it is wary is wrong. sent19: the hazard is greater. sent20: the fact that either the exegete is cranial or it is an indulgence or both is not false. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 & sent1 -> int1: the hazard is prismatic and it is participial.; int1 -> int2: the hazard is participial.; int2 -> int3: the hazard is participial and/or it is intelligent.; int3 & sent15 -> int4: the clearing is not a Foster.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Foster.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the exegete is not cranial and it is unwary is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it is not cranial and is not wary is wrong.; int7 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__