the decaf is a enology.
sent1: the working is not a yucca. sent2: if the decaf dwarfs Springfield then the fact that it is a enology is true. sent3: if the nuclease does not dwarf Springfield then the fact that the linden does not dwarf Springfield hold. sent4: if something does not interfere tripe then that it does not uplift anthropometry and is main is not correct. sent5: that the decaf does dwarf Springfield hold if the bellbird does interfere temperance. sent6: the screw dwarfs watercannon and is chemoreceptive. sent7: if the screw dwarfs watercannon and is chemoreceptive the fact that the working does not interfere atom is correct. sent8: the bellbird does not escort decaf but it communicates. sent9: if something that does not escort decaf communicates then it does interfere temperance. sent10: if that the fact that the linden does interfere temperance and is not a enology is right is wrong then the decaf is not a enology. sent11: that something does interfere temperance and is not a enology is not true if it does not dwarf Springfield. sent12: the bellbird communicates.
sent9 -> int1: if the bellbird does not escort decaf but it communicates it interferes temperance.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the bellbird interferes temperance.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the decaf does dwarf Springfield.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the decaf is not a enology.
sent11 -> int4: if the linden does not dwarf Springfield that it interferes temperance and is not a enology is false.; sent4 -> int5: if the C does not interfere tripe then that it does not uplift anthropometry and is a kind of a main is wrong.; sent7 & sent6 -> int6: the working does not interfere atom.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the working does not interfere atom and is not a yucca.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it does not interfere atom and is not a yucca.;
$hypothesis$ = the decaf is a enology. ; $context$ = sent1: the working is not a yucca. sent2: if the decaf dwarfs Springfield then the fact that it is a enology is true. sent3: if the nuclease does not dwarf Springfield then the fact that the linden does not dwarf Springfield hold. sent4: if something does not interfere tripe then that it does not uplift anthropometry and is main is not correct. sent5: that the decaf does dwarf Springfield hold if the bellbird does interfere temperance. sent6: the screw dwarfs watercannon and is chemoreceptive. sent7: if the screw dwarfs watercannon and is chemoreceptive the fact that the working does not interfere atom is correct. sent8: the bellbird does not escort decaf but it communicates. sent9: if something that does not escort decaf communicates then it does interfere temperance. sent10: if that the fact that the linden does interfere temperance and is not a enology is right is wrong then the decaf is not a enology. sent11: that something does interfere temperance and is not a enology is not true if it does not dwarf Springfield. sent12: the bellbird communicates. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> int1: if the bellbird does not escort decaf but it communicates it interferes temperance.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the bellbird interferes temperance.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the decaf does dwarf Springfield.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__