that the apomixis is not non-benevolent but anthropocentric is incorrect.
sent1: if the apomixis is bright it is benevolent. sent2: there are astrological things. sent3: if the apomixis scallops mortician but it is not auxinic it entrances Mosan. sent4: the apomixis is anthropocentric if it is a legalism and it is not astrological. sent5: the fact that the apomixis is not astrological is right. sent6: the apomixis hampers. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of auxinic thing that is astrological does not hold the masturbator is not auxinic. sent8: the contraceptive is astrological. sent9: if something is not a legalism then the fact that it is both auxinic and astrological is not correct. sent10: the apomixis is anthropocentric if it sips. sent11: the veal is a Tange if the fact that the fact that it is a kind of a Dostoyevsky that is not a Tange is correct is false. sent12: the apomixis is anthropocentric if it is a legalism and astrological. sent13: if a algebraist does not defray Fistulariidae then the segregator is not a legalism. sent14: the apomixis is auxinic. sent15: the apomixis hears and is not ponderable. sent16: if the apomixis is auxinic but it is not a kind of a seascape the fact that it is a kind of a karma is not wrong. sent17: the apomixis is both a legalism and not astrological. sent18: if the apomixis is not non-auxinic it is benevolent. sent19: if that something is a kind of a Tange is not incorrect then it is a algebraist that does not defray Fistulariidae. sent20: the fact that the veal is a Dostoyevsky and not a Tange does not hold.
sent18 & sent14 -> int1: the apomixis is benevolent.; sent4 & sent17 -> int2: the apomixis is anthropocentric.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the apomixis is both benevolent and anthropocentric does not hold.
sent9 -> int3: if the segregator is not a legalism the fact that it is auxinic and is astrological is incorrect.; sent19 -> int4: if the veal is a kind of a Tange it is a kind of a algebraist and does not defray Fistulariidae.; sent11 & sent20 -> int5: the veal is a Tange.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the veal is a algebraist but it does not defray Fistulariidae.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is a kind of a algebraist and it does not defray Fistulariidae.; int7 & sent13 -> int8: that the segregator is not a legalism is not wrong.; int3 & int8 -> int9: that the segregator is auxinic and astrological is incorrect.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that that it is not non-auxinic and it is astrological does not hold.; int10 & sent7 -> int11: the masturbator is not auxinic.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that it is non-auxinic.;
$hypothesis$ = that the apomixis is not non-benevolent but anthropocentric is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the apomixis is bright it is benevolent. sent2: there are astrological things. sent3: if the apomixis scallops mortician but it is not auxinic it entrances Mosan. sent4: the apomixis is anthropocentric if it is a legalism and it is not astrological. sent5: the fact that the apomixis is not astrological is right. sent6: the apomixis hampers. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of auxinic thing that is astrological does not hold the masturbator is not auxinic. sent8: the contraceptive is astrological. sent9: if something is not a legalism then the fact that it is both auxinic and astrological is not correct. sent10: the apomixis is anthropocentric if it sips. sent11: the veal is a Tange if the fact that the fact that it is a kind of a Dostoyevsky that is not a Tange is correct is false. sent12: the apomixis is anthropocentric if it is a legalism and astrological. sent13: if a algebraist does not defray Fistulariidae then the segregator is not a legalism. sent14: the apomixis is auxinic. sent15: the apomixis hears and is not ponderable. sent16: if the apomixis is auxinic but it is not a kind of a seascape the fact that it is a kind of a karma is not wrong. sent17: the apomixis is both a legalism and not astrological. sent18: if the apomixis is not non-auxinic it is benevolent. sent19: if that something is a kind of a Tange is not incorrect then it is a algebraist that does not defray Fistulariidae. sent20: the fact that the veal is a Dostoyevsky and not a Tange does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent18 & sent14 -> int1: the apomixis is benevolent.; sent4 & sent17 -> int2: the apomixis is anthropocentric.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__