that the smuggler bunks polymerization is not wrong.
sent1: the smuggler is a heartwood. sent2: if the defecation is ametropic then it is a kind of a grapefruit. sent3: the smuggler is a kind of a heartwood if the saunterer is not ametropic. sent4: that the defecation does not acquaint trundle and is a grapefruit is incorrect if the coonskin is not a kind of a grapefruit. sent5: if the fact that something is a heartwood and it bunks polymerization is not correct then it is not a grapefruit. sent6: there exists nothing such that it is an original that is a kind of a cornice. sent7: something does not acquaint atelier if it is not a kind of an original. sent8: the cripple is vacuolate and it is a paster. sent9: that the saunterer is not ametropic is correct if that the defecation does not acquaint trundle but it is a grapefruit is false. sent10: the cripple is a paster. sent11: the fact that the smuggler is a heartwood that does not bunk polymerization is not incorrect if the saunterer is not ametropic. sent12: if the coonskin is unoriginal then the fact that it does not acquaint atelier is true. sent13: there is something such that it is a kind of a paster. sent14: the coonskin is sentential if a vacuolate thing is a paster. sent15: if something that is sentential does not acquaint atelier it is not a kind of a grapefruit. sent16: if that something is an original and it does cornice does not hold it does not acquaint atelier. sent17: if something acquaints trundle then it is ametropic. sent18: there exists something such that it is vacuolate. sent19: the saunterer is not ametropic if the defecation is not a grapefruit. sent20: if something acquaints atelier it bunks polymerization.
sent6 -> int1: the fact that the coonskin is a kind of an original and is a cornice is false.; sent16 -> int2: if that the coonskin is both original and a cornice does not hold then it does not acquaint atelier.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the coonskin does not acquaint atelier.; sent8 -> int4: there is something such that it is not non-vacuolate and it is a paster.; int4 & sent14 -> int5: the coonskin is sentential.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the coonskin is sentential and does not acquaint atelier.; sent15 -> int7: if the coonskin is sentential but it does not acquaint atelier then it is not a grapefruit.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the coonskin is not a grapefruit is correct.; int8 & sent4 -> int9: the fact that the defecation does not acquaint trundle but it is a kind of a grapefruit is wrong.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the fact that the saunterer is not ametropic is not false.; int10 & sent11 -> int11: the smuggler is a heartwood and does not bunk polymerization.; int11 -> hypothesis;
the smuggler bunks polymerization.
sent20 -> int12: if the smuggler does acquaint atelier then it bunks polymerization.; sent17 -> int13: if the defecation does acquaint trundle it is ametropic.;
$hypothesis$ = that the smuggler bunks polymerization is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the smuggler is a heartwood. sent2: if the defecation is ametropic then it is a kind of a grapefruit. sent3: the smuggler is a kind of a heartwood if the saunterer is not ametropic. sent4: that the defecation does not acquaint trundle and is a grapefruit is incorrect if the coonskin is not a kind of a grapefruit. sent5: if the fact that something is a heartwood and it bunks polymerization is not correct then it is not a grapefruit. sent6: there exists nothing such that it is an original that is a kind of a cornice. sent7: something does not acquaint atelier if it is not a kind of an original. sent8: the cripple is vacuolate and it is a paster. sent9: that the saunterer is not ametropic is correct if that the defecation does not acquaint trundle but it is a grapefruit is false. sent10: the cripple is a paster. sent11: the fact that the smuggler is a heartwood that does not bunk polymerization is not incorrect if the saunterer is not ametropic. sent12: if the coonskin is unoriginal then the fact that it does not acquaint atelier is true. sent13: there is something such that it is a kind of a paster. sent14: the coonskin is sentential if a vacuolate thing is a paster. sent15: if something that is sentential does not acquaint atelier it is not a kind of a grapefruit. sent16: if that something is an original and it does cornice does not hold it does not acquaint atelier. sent17: if something acquaints trundle then it is ametropic. sent18: there exists something such that it is vacuolate. sent19: the saunterer is not ametropic if the defecation is not a grapefruit. sent20: if something acquaints atelier it bunks polymerization. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: the fact that the coonskin is a kind of an original and is a cornice is false.; sent16 -> int2: if that the coonskin is both original and a cornice does not hold then it does not acquaint atelier.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the coonskin does not acquaint atelier.; sent8 -> int4: there is something such that it is not non-vacuolate and it is a paster.; int4 & sent14 -> int5: the coonskin is sentential.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the coonskin is sentential and does not acquaint atelier.; sent15 -> int7: if the coonskin is sentential but it does not acquaint atelier then it is not a grapefruit.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the coonskin is not a grapefruit is correct.; int8 & sent4 -> int9: the fact that the defecation does not acquaint trundle but it is a kind of a grapefruit is wrong.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the fact that the saunterer is not ametropic is not false.; int10 & sent11 -> int11: the smuggler is a heartwood and does not bunk polymerization.; int11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__