the lama is adventitial.
sent1: the metabolism is a kind of a Purace. sent2: the metabolism is a kind of an oboist and does strike debt. sent3: the lama does shout and is a kind of a epigraphy. sent4: the lama is a Purace and it does shout. sent5: the coax does strike vinaigrette and it is adventitial. sent6: the propagator is not a kind of a epigraphy and/or it does not madden thrashing. sent7: the propagator does not shout if the lama does not shout or does not madden thrashing or both. sent8: the propagator does madden thrashing if something is both a Purace and not non-adventitial. sent9: if the metabolism is not a epigraphy that the propagator does not madden thrashing is right. sent10: there is something such that it is a Purace. sent11: there is something such that it does shout and does madden thrashing. sent12: the metabolism does not madden thrashing or it is not a kind of a epigraphy or both. sent13: the propagator does not madden thrashing if the metabolism does not madden thrashing and/or it is not a epigraphy. sent14: the lama does shout. sent15: the guama does not shout. sent16: the hasp is a epigraphy. sent17: the metabolism is not a Minuteman and/or it is not adventitial. sent18: there exists something such that it is adventitial. sent19: something maddens thrashing and shouts. sent20: the metabolism does not madden thrashing or is a epigraphy or both. sent21: the lama is adventitial if the fact that the propagator does not shout but it is not adventitial is incorrect.
sent4 -> int1: the lama is a kind of a Purace.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lama is adventitial.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lama is both a Purace and adventitial.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Purace that is adventitial.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the propagator maddens thrashing.; sent13 & sent12 -> int5: that the propagator does not madden thrashing is right.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the lama is adventitial.
$hypothesis$ = the lama is adventitial. ; $context$ = sent1: the metabolism is a kind of a Purace. sent2: the metabolism is a kind of an oboist and does strike debt. sent3: the lama does shout and is a kind of a epigraphy. sent4: the lama is a Purace and it does shout. sent5: the coax does strike vinaigrette and it is adventitial. sent6: the propagator is not a kind of a epigraphy and/or it does not madden thrashing. sent7: the propagator does not shout if the lama does not shout or does not madden thrashing or both. sent8: the propagator does madden thrashing if something is both a Purace and not non-adventitial. sent9: if the metabolism is not a epigraphy that the propagator does not madden thrashing is right. sent10: there is something such that it is a Purace. sent11: there is something such that it does shout and does madden thrashing. sent12: the metabolism does not madden thrashing or it is not a kind of a epigraphy or both. sent13: the propagator does not madden thrashing if the metabolism does not madden thrashing and/or it is not a epigraphy. sent14: the lama does shout. sent15: the guama does not shout. sent16: the hasp is a epigraphy. sent17: the metabolism is not a Minuteman and/or it is not adventitial. sent18: there exists something such that it is adventitial. sent19: something maddens thrashing and shouts. sent20: the metabolism does not madden thrashing or is a epigraphy or both. sent21: the lama is adventitial if the fact that the propagator does not shout but it is not adventitial is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: the lama is a kind of a Purace.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lama is adventitial.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lama is both a Purace and adventitial.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Purace that is adventitial.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the propagator maddens thrashing.; sent13 & sent12 -> int5: that the propagator does not madden thrashing is right.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__