the steelyard is a potentiation.
sent1: if the opepe is a bishop then that it is not a kind of a chasm and it is hepatic is wrong. sent2: something is resistive and it is Rhodesian if it is not Rwandan. sent3: the fact that something is Rhodesian and is not a Rwandan does not hold if it is corvine. sent4: if that the streptobacillus is not an indestructibility and/or it is Rhodesian is wrong then that the steelyard is a Rwandan is right. sent5: the steelyard is not a kind of an indestructibility if that the opepe is not a chasm but hepatic does not hold. sent6: there is something such that it is a jackpot and incorrupt. sent7: the steelyard is a crystal if the grouch is a kind of a crystal. sent8: that something is a potentiation if it is Rwandan is true. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is a jackpot that is not corrupt is incorrect then the fact that the Burgess is a kind of an indestructibility is true. sent10: something is resistive if it is both not an indestructibility and non-Rhodesian. sent11: something is not a potentiation if that it is not non-resistive is right. sent12: the opepe is resistive. sent13: that the grouch is a jackpot and is not corrupt does not hold if that the opepe is not non-resistive is correct. sent14: the opepe is a kind of a bishop. sent15: something is corvine if it is a crystal.
sent13 & sent12 -> int1: that the grouch is a jackpot and not corrupt does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is a jackpot and it does not corrupt is not correct.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the Burgess is a kind of an indestructibility.; sent8 -> int4: the steelyard is a potentiation if it is a Rwandan.;
that the chorion is Welsh and not an indestructibility does not hold.
sent2 -> int5: if the opepe is not a kind of a Rwandan then it is not non-resistive and it is Rhodesian.;
$hypothesis$ = the steelyard is a potentiation. ; $context$ = sent1: if the opepe is a bishop then that it is not a kind of a chasm and it is hepatic is wrong. sent2: something is resistive and it is Rhodesian if it is not Rwandan. sent3: the fact that something is Rhodesian and is not a Rwandan does not hold if it is corvine. sent4: if that the streptobacillus is not an indestructibility and/or it is Rhodesian is wrong then that the steelyard is a Rwandan is right. sent5: the steelyard is not a kind of an indestructibility if that the opepe is not a chasm but hepatic does not hold. sent6: there is something such that it is a jackpot and incorrupt. sent7: the steelyard is a crystal if the grouch is a kind of a crystal. sent8: that something is a potentiation if it is Rwandan is true. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is a jackpot that is not corrupt is incorrect then the fact that the Burgess is a kind of an indestructibility is true. sent10: something is resistive if it is both not an indestructibility and non-Rhodesian. sent11: something is not a potentiation if that it is not non-resistive is right. sent12: the opepe is resistive. sent13: that the grouch is a jackpot and is not corrupt does not hold if that the opepe is not non-resistive is correct. sent14: the opepe is a kind of a bishop. sent15: something is corvine if it is a crystal. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 & sent12 -> int1: that the grouch is a jackpot and not corrupt does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is a jackpot and it does not corrupt is not correct.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the Burgess is a kind of an indestructibility.; sent8 -> int4: the steelyard is a potentiation if it is a Rwandan.; __UNKNOWN__