the etiologist is a inspectorship.
sent1: something is cerebellar if it does debrief etiologist. sent2: something is a kind of a inspectorship that does amplify Annunciation if the fact that it does not spoil dunghill is right. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a commonwealth and is not ataxic does not hold. sent4: if the Olmec is an electron then the loading is a kind of an electron. sent5: The Annunciation does amplify loading. sent6: if the stepdaughter is not easy the Olmec is Old and it is an electron. sent7: the pad does debrief etiologist if there is something such that the fact that it is a commonwealth and not ataxic is false. sent8: the palanquin does not amplify Annunciation. sent9: if the loading does amplify Annunciation then the fact that either it is a burner or it does not spoil chaetodon or both is not true. sent10: if the etiologist does surface clerkship then it is not icterogenic. sent11: if the etiologist is not a joyride and it is not a inspectorship the loading is a kind of a inspectorship. sent12: the loading does amplify Annunciation. sent13: the loading is not a inspectorship if that the etiologist does amplify Annunciation and/or it does not spoil chaetodon does not hold. sent14: if the fact that the loading is a burner and/or it does not spoil chaetodon is incorrect then the etiologist is not a inspectorship. sent15: something does not spoil dunghill if the fact that it is a joyride and it is not wolflike is not right. sent16: something does not amplify Annunciation if that it is not a kind of a inspectorship and amplify Annunciation is incorrect. sent17: the etiologist is not a kind of a burner if that either the loading amplifies Annunciation or it does not spoil chaetodon or both does not hold. sent18: the fact that the loading is a inspectorship or does not spoil chaetodon or both is incorrect. sent19: if something does not amplify Annunciation that that it is a novel or does not amplify Wagnerian or both hold is false. sent20: something does not amplify Verdi and it does not luxuriate if it is not non-cerebellar. sent21: the loading is not a inspectorship if the fact that the etiologist spoils chaetodon and/or it is not a burner is false. sent22: the loading does spoil hysterectomy if it is an electron. sent23: if the pad does not amplify Verdi and it does not luxuriate that the stepdaughter does not luxuriate is true. sent24: if something does not luxuriate it is a kind of uneasy thing that does not surface madrigal.
sent9 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the loading is a kind of a burner or it does not spoil chaetodon or both is wrong.; int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
that the etiologist is a inspectorship is not false.
sent2 -> int2: the etiologist is a inspectorship and it does amplify Annunciation if the fact that it spoils dunghill is not right.; sent15 -> int3: if that the etiologist is a joyride and not wolflike is not true it does not spoil dunghill.; sent24 -> int4: if the stepdaughter does not luxuriate it is not easy and does not surface madrigal.; sent20 -> int5: if the pad is cerebellar then it does not amplify Verdi and does not luxuriate.; sent1 -> int6: the pad is cerebellar if it does debrief etiologist.; sent3 & sent7 -> int7: the fact that the pad debriefs etiologist is correct.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the pad is cerebellar.; int5 & int8 -> int9: the pad does not amplify Verdi and it does not luxuriate.; sent23 & int9 -> int10: the stepdaughter does not luxuriate.; int4 & int10 -> int11: the stepdaughter is not easy and does not surface madrigal.; int11 -> int12: the stepdaughter is not easy.; sent6 & int12 -> int13: the Olmec is Old and an electron.; int13 -> int14: the Olmec is an electron.; sent4 & int14 -> int15: the loading is an electron.; sent22 & int15 -> int16: the loading does spoil hysterectomy.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that it spoils hysterectomy.;
$hypothesis$ = the etiologist is a inspectorship. ; $context$ = sent1: something is cerebellar if it does debrief etiologist. sent2: something is a kind of a inspectorship that does amplify Annunciation if the fact that it does not spoil dunghill is right. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a commonwealth and is not ataxic does not hold. sent4: if the Olmec is an electron then the loading is a kind of an electron. sent5: The Annunciation does amplify loading. sent6: if the stepdaughter is not easy the Olmec is Old and it is an electron. sent7: the pad does debrief etiologist if there is something such that the fact that it is a commonwealth and not ataxic is false. sent8: the palanquin does not amplify Annunciation. sent9: if the loading does amplify Annunciation then the fact that either it is a burner or it does not spoil chaetodon or both is not true. sent10: if the etiologist does surface clerkship then it is not icterogenic. sent11: if the etiologist is not a joyride and it is not a inspectorship the loading is a kind of a inspectorship. sent12: the loading does amplify Annunciation. sent13: the loading is not a inspectorship if that the etiologist does amplify Annunciation and/or it does not spoil chaetodon does not hold. sent14: if the fact that the loading is a burner and/or it does not spoil chaetodon is incorrect then the etiologist is not a inspectorship. sent15: something does not spoil dunghill if the fact that it is a joyride and it is not wolflike is not right. sent16: something does not amplify Annunciation if that it is not a kind of a inspectorship and amplify Annunciation is incorrect. sent17: the etiologist is not a kind of a burner if that either the loading amplifies Annunciation or it does not spoil chaetodon or both does not hold. sent18: the fact that the loading is a inspectorship or does not spoil chaetodon or both is incorrect. sent19: if something does not amplify Annunciation that that it is a novel or does not amplify Wagnerian or both hold is false. sent20: something does not amplify Verdi and it does not luxuriate if it is not non-cerebellar. sent21: the loading is not a inspectorship if the fact that the etiologist spoils chaetodon and/or it is not a burner is false. sent22: the loading does spoil hysterectomy if it is an electron. sent23: if the pad does not amplify Verdi and it does not luxuriate that the stepdaughter does not luxuriate is true. sent24: if something does not luxuriate it is a kind of uneasy thing that does not surface madrigal. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the loading is a kind of a burner or it does not spoil chaetodon or both is wrong.; int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__