the hybridization is physicochemical.
sent1: if the Monitor does articulate casuistry then the holothurian is a kind of a poultry. sent2: something articulates casuistry if it is a devitalization. sent3: the fact that the ravehook does not toilet-train luciferin and is a poultry is not correct if the holothurian is a poultry. sent4: the hybridization is not physicochemical if the cutch does syllogize flood. sent5: the luciferin is a garnishment if there is something such that the fact that it is Shakespearian and not a narcoleptic does not hold. sent6: if either something is not a kind of a poultry or it does not toilet-train luciferin or both then it does articulate casuistry. sent7: there is something such that that it is a kind of a Shakespearian and it is not a narcoleptic is wrong. sent8: if something is a garnishment it is physicochemical. sent9: the hybridization is a devitalization if the fact that it articulates casuistry is right. sent10: something that is a stupefaction does syllogize flood. sent11: the Monitor is a kind of a devitalization if the luciferin is a garnishment. sent12: something is a kind of a garnishment if that it is a devitalization is not false. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Shakespearian and it is not narcoleptic is right. sent14: the cutch syllogizes flood if that that the ravehook does not toilet-train luciferin and is a poultry is not correct is right. sent15: something is not a poultry and/or does not toilet-train luciferin if it does syllogize flood.
sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the luciferin is a garnishment.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the Monitor is a devitalization.; sent2 -> int3: the Monitor articulates casuistry if it is a kind of a devitalization.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Monitor does articulate casuistry.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the holothurian is a poultry.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the fact that the ravehook does not toilet-train luciferin but it is a poultry is not correct.; int6 & sent14 -> int7: the cutch does syllogize flood.; int7 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the hybridization is physicochemical.
sent8 -> int8: if the hybridization is a garnishment then it is physicochemical.; sent12 -> int9: if the hybridization is a devitalization then it is a garnishment.; sent6 -> int10: the hybridization does articulate casuistry if it is not a poultry or does not toilet-train luciferin or both.; sent15 -> int11: if the hybridization syllogizes flood it is not a kind of a poultry and/or it does not toilet-train luciferin.; sent10 -> int12: the hybridization syllogizes flood if it is a stupefaction.;
$hypothesis$ = the hybridization is physicochemical. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Monitor does articulate casuistry then the holothurian is a kind of a poultry. sent2: something articulates casuistry if it is a devitalization. sent3: the fact that the ravehook does not toilet-train luciferin and is a poultry is not correct if the holothurian is a poultry. sent4: the hybridization is not physicochemical if the cutch does syllogize flood. sent5: the luciferin is a garnishment if there is something such that the fact that it is Shakespearian and not a narcoleptic does not hold. sent6: if either something is not a kind of a poultry or it does not toilet-train luciferin or both then it does articulate casuistry. sent7: there is something such that that it is a kind of a Shakespearian and it is not a narcoleptic is wrong. sent8: if something is a garnishment it is physicochemical. sent9: the hybridization is a devitalization if the fact that it articulates casuistry is right. sent10: something that is a stupefaction does syllogize flood. sent11: the Monitor is a kind of a devitalization if the luciferin is a garnishment. sent12: something is a kind of a garnishment if that it is a devitalization is not false. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Shakespearian and it is not narcoleptic is right. sent14: the cutch syllogizes flood if that that the ravehook does not toilet-train luciferin and is a poultry is not correct is right. sent15: something is not a poultry and/or does not toilet-train luciferin if it does syllogize flood. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the luciferin is a garnishment.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the Monitor is a devitalization.; sent2 -> int3: the Monitor articulates casuistry if it is a kind of a devitalization.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Monitor does articulate casuistry.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the holothurian is a poultry.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the fact that the ravehook does not toilet-train luciferin but it is a poultry is not correct.; int6 & sent14 -> int7: the cutch does syllogize flood.; int7 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__