the fact that the KR is not unattributable is right.
sent1: if the fact that there is something such that that it is both a daughter-in-law and not Sadducean does not hold is right the red is not a daughter-in-law. sent2: the kiln sticks diphenylhydantoin. sent3: that the KR does foul if the kiln is not a plumpness but unattributable is true. sent4: something is not a tourtiere and it is not foul if it is not a kind of a daughter-in-law. sent5: the Chicano is not unattributable but it is a Nigerien. sent6: the KR is not unattributable but it fouls if there is something such that it is a plumpness. sent7: something is a Apsu. sent8: if there is something such that that it is a Apsu is not false the kiln is not a plumpness. sent9: the KR is phalangeal. sent10: something is not a dowse if either it is not a Huntsville or it does throng or both. sent11: if the kiln is attributable and/or is not a kind of a Apsu then the KR is attributable. sent12: that the myelinization is a pseudophloem but it does not incriminate neurochemical is not right. sent13: the fact that the myelinization incriminates neurochemical is correct if the fact that it is a pseudophloem and does not incriminates neurochemical is false. sent14: something is not a Huntsville and/or it throngs if the fact that it does incriminate neurochemical is not incorrect. sent15: the kiln is not a kind of a plumpness but it is a foul if something is a kind of a Apsu. sent16: that the vesiculovirus is foul hold. sent17: the fact that something is both a daughter-in-law and not Sadducean is incorrect if it is not a kind of a dowse. sent18: if the kiln is not a plumpness but it is a kind of a foul the KR is unattributable. sent19: if the kiln is a plumpness and foul then the KR is unattributable. sent20: the kiln is not a plumpness.
sent7 & sent15 -> int1: the kiln is not a plumpness but a foul.; sent18 & int1 -> hypothesis;
the KR is not unattributable.
sent4 -> int2: if the red is not a daughter-in-law then it is both not a tourtiere and not a foul.; sent17 -> int3: the fact that the myelinization is a daughter-in-law but it is not Sadducean does not hold if it does not dowse.; sent10 -> int4: the myelinization does not dowse if it is not a kind of a Huntsville and/or it throngs.; sent14 -> int5: the myelinization is not a kind of a Huntsville and/or it does throng if it does incriminate neurochemical.; sent13 & sent12 -> int6: the myelinization does incriminate neurochemical.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the myelinization either is not a Huntsville or does throng or both.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the myelinization is not a dowse.; int3 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the myelinization is both a daughter-in-law and non-Sadducean is not correct.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that that it is a daughter-in-law and it is not Sadducean is incorrect.; int10 & sent1 -> int11: the red is not a daughter-in-law.; int2 & int11 -> int12: the red is not a tourtiere and it does not foul.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that it is not a tourtiere and not a foul.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the KR is not unattributable is right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that there is something such that that it is both a daughter-in-law and not Sadducean does not hold is right the red is not a daughter-in-law. sent2: the kiln sticks diphenylhydantoin. sent3: that the KR does foul if the kiln is not a plumpness but unattributable is true. sent4: something is not a tourtiere and it is not foul if it is not a kind of a daughter-in-law. sent5: the Chicano is not unattributable but it is a Nigerien. sent6: the KR is not unattributable but it fouls if there is something such that it is a plumpness. sent7: something is a Apsu. sent8: if there is something such that that it is a Apsu is not false the kiln is not a plumpness. sent9: the KR is phalangeal. sent10: something is not a dowse if either it is not a Huntsville or it does throng or both. sent11: if the kiln is attributable and/or is not a kind of a Apsu then the KR is attributable. sent12: that the myelinization is a pseudophloem but it does not incriminate neurochemical is not right. sent13: the fact that the myelinization incriminates neurochemical is correct if the fact that it is a pseudophloem and does not incriminates neurochemical is false. sent14: something is not a Huntsville and/or it throngs if the fact that it does incriminate neurochemical is not incorrect. sent15: the kiln is not a kind of a plumpness but it is a foul if something is a kind of a Apsu. sent16: that the vesiculovirus is foul hold. sent17: the fact that something is both a daughter-in-law and not Sadducean is incorrect if it is not a kind of a dowse. sent18: if the kiln is not a plumpness but it is a kind of a foul the KR is unattributable. sent19: if the kiln is a plumpness and foul then the KR is unattributable. sent20: the kiln is not a plumpness. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 & sent15 -> int1: the kiln is not a plumpness but a foul.; sent18 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__