the hilum is not a kind of a puddle.
sent1: if the blogger is not disreputable then the hilum does clear and is disreputable. sent2: if the spiv does not corner aridity and does weed combination the ligule does not clear. sent3: something is a kind of a puddle if that it is a kind of a clearing is true. sent4: that the collider is not a clearing and is not serous is wrong. sent5: that the abaca is not a brethren is not false if the towel is not a brethren and pelts. sent6: something is not a kind of a puddle if that it is a clearing and/or disreputable does not hold. sent7: the hilum does better beanstalk. sent8: the blogger is not caloric if something that weeds combination does corner aridity. sent9: the spiv is not a frontierswoman if the abaca is not a kind of a brethren. sent10: if something is not a frontierswoman it does not corner aridity and it weeds combination. sent11: there exists something such that it corners aridity. sent12: that the collider is serous and it is a brethren is incorrect. sent13: the fact that either the hilum clears or it is disreputable or both is not right if that the collider does not weed combination hold. sent14: if the collider is a brethren the blogger is not serous. sent15: that something is not serous and not caloric is incorrect if it is disreputable. sent16: that the collider is serous but it is not a kind of a brethren is incorrect. sent17: if the collider is disreputable but it does not puddle then the hilum is not a puddle. sent18: the blogger is not serous if the fact that the collider is serous but it is not a kind of a brethren is wrong. sent19: there exists something such that it weeds combination and it corners aridity.
sent15 -> int1: if the blogger is disreputable then the fact that it is not serous and it is not caloric is false.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blogger is disreputable.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the blogger is non-serous thing that is non-caloric is not true.; sent18 & sent16 -> int3: the blogger is not serous.; sent19 & sent8 -> int4: the blogger is non-caloric.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the blogger is not serous and it is not caloric.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the blogger is not disreputable.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: the hilum clears and is disreputable.; int8 -> int9: the hilum does clear.; sent3 -> int10: the hilum is a kind of a puddle if it is a clearing.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the hilum is not a kind of a puddle.
sent10 -> int11: if the spiv is not a kind of a frontierswoman then it does not corner aridity and weeds combination.;
$hypothesis$ = the hilum is not a kind of a puddle. ; $context$ = sent1: if the blogger is not disreputable then the hilum does clear and is disreputable. sent2: if the spiv does not corner aridity and does weed combination the ligule does not clear. sent3: something is a kind of a puddle if that it is a kind of a clearing is true. sent4: that the collider is not a clearing and is not serous is wrong. sent5: that the abaca is not a brethren is not false if the towel is not a brethren and pelts. sent6: something is not a kind of a puddle if that it is a clearing and/or disreputable does not hold. sent7: the hilum does better beanstalk. sent8: the blogger is not caloric if something that weeds combination does corner aridity. sent9: the spiv is not a frontierswoman if the abaca is not a kind of a brethren. sent10: if something is not a frontierswoman it does not corner aridity and it weeds combination. sent11: there exists something such that it corners aridity. sent12: that the collider is serous and it is a brethren is incorrect. sent13: the fact that either the hilum clears or it is disreputable or both is not right if that the collider does not weed combination hold. sent14: if the collider is a brethren the blogger is not serous. sent15: that something is not serous and not caloric is incorrect if it is disreputable. sent16: that the collider is serous but it is not a kind of a brethren is incorrect. sent17: if the collider is disreputable but it does not puddle then the hilum is not a puddle. sent18: the blogger is not serous if the fact that the collider is serous but it is not a kind of a brethren is wrong. sent19: there exists something such that it weeds combination and it corners aridity. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 -> int1: if the blogger is disreputable then the fact that it is not serous and it is not caloric is false.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blogger is disreputable.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the blogger is non-serous thing that is non-caloric is not true.; sent18 & sent16 -> int3: the blogger is not serous.; sent19 & sent8 -> int4: the blogger is non-caloric.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the blogger is not serous and it is not caloric.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the blogger is not disreputable.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: the hilum clears and is disreputable.; int8 -> int9: the hilum does clear.; sent3 -> int10: the hilum is a kind of a puddle if it is a clearing.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__