the panorama does front.
sent1: the fact that the Pavlova is a kind of a Tanakh is correct. sent2: the panorama is not a front if that it is a bullshit is right. sent3: something locates and/or does not mine. sent4: that the Selkup is not apteral and it is not a vocal does not hold if the call-in is not apteral. sent5: that the Pavlova does not lob insurgent is false if something locates and/or it is not a kind of a mine. sent6: if that the Ford is a paving and it does lob Orissa is incorrect the call-in is not apteral. sent7: if the fact that the Selkup is not apteral and it is not a vocal is not correct then the Pavlova is naturistic. sent8: the fact that the Ford is a kind of a paving that does lob Orissa is false. sent9: if something is a vocal then it is a front. sent10: if the sulfamethazine is a pyrrhic then the panorama is a bullshit. sent11: if the call-in is not apteral then the fact that the Selkup is apteral but it is not a vocal does not hold. sent12: the fact that the sulfamethazine is pyrrhic hold if something lobs insurgent and it is not non-naturistic.
sent6 & sent8 -> int1: the call-in is not apteral.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the Selkup is a kind of non-apteral thing that is not a vocal is false.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the Pavlova is naturistic.; sent3 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the fact that the Pavlova does not lob insurgent is not right is true.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Pavlova lobs insurgent and it is naturistic.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it does lob insurgent and is naturistic hold.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the fact that the sulfamethazine is pyrrhic hold.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the panorama does bullshit.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the panorama is not non-front.
sent9 -> int9: that the panorama is front if the panorama is a vocal is not wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the panorama does front. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Pavlova is a kind of a Tanakh is correct. sent2: the panorama is not a front if that it is a bullshit is right. sent3: something locates and/or does not mine. sent4: that the Selkup is not apteral and it is not a vocal does not hold if the call-in is not apteral. sent5: that the Pavlova does not lob insurgent is false if something locates and/or it is not a kind of a mine. sent6: if that the Ford is a paving and it does lob Orissa is incorrect the call-in is not apteral. sent7: if the fact that the Selkup is not apteral and it is not a vocal is not correct then the Pavlova is naturistic. sent8: the fact that the Ford is a kind of a paving that does lob Orissa is false. sent9: if something is a vocal then it is a front. sent10: if the sulfamethazine is a pyrrhic then the panorama is a bullshit. sent11: if the call-in is not apteral then the fact that the Selkup is apteral but it is not a vocal does not hold. sent12: the fact that the sulfamethazine is pyrrhic hold if something lobs insurgent and it is not non-naturistic. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 & sent8 -> int1: the call-in is not apteral.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the Selkup is a kind of non-apteral thing that is not a vocal is false.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the Pavlova is naturistic.; sent3 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the fact that the Pavlova does not lob insurgent is not right is true.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Pavlova lobs insurgent and it is naturistic.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it does lob insurgent and is naturistic hold.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the fact that the sulfamethazine is pyrrhic hold.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the panorama does bullshit.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__