the sneak is not photochemical.
sent1: the after-shave is not photochemical. sent2: the fact that if the megacolon is a propanal but it does not pigment aspergill then the after-shave is not a LEM is not wrong. sent3: if that something is not on-the-job is not false then it is not an idealist and not a LEM. sent4: if the after-shave is not a LEM that the aspergill is a kind of an idealist and/or is a LEM is false. sent5: the bluefish is not a kind of a propanal. sent6: something is not a LEM. sent7: if the after-shave is not a kind of a LEM the aspergill is not a LEM. sent8: there exists something such that it is not an idealist. sent9: the megacolon is a propanal and does not pigment aspergill. sent10: the sneak is photochemical if there is something such that that it is an idealist or is a kind of a LEM or both is false. sent11: the aspergill is not a LEM. sent12: if the after-shave is not an idealist then that the megacolon is a vocal or it is a ministrant or both is not right.
sent2 & sent9 -> int1: the after-shave is not a LEM.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the fact that either the aspergill is an idealist or it is a kind of a LEM or both is not correct.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that that it is an idealist and/or is a kind of a LEM does not hold.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the sneak is not photochemical.
sent3 -> int4: the megacolon is not an idealist and not a LEM if it is not on-the-job.;
$hypothesis$ = the sneak is not photochemical. ; $context$ = sent1: the after-shave is not photochemical. sent2: the fact that if the megacolon is a propanal but it does not pigment aspergill then the after-shave is not a LEM is not wrong. sent3: if that something is not on-the-job is not false then it is not an idealist and not a LEM. sent4: if the after-shave is not a LEM that the aspergill is a kind of an idealist and/or is a LEM is false. sent5: the bluefish is not a kind of a propanal. sent6: something is not a LEM. sent7: if the after-shave is not a kind of a LEM the aspergill is not a LEM. sent8: there exists something such that it is not an idealist. sent9: the megacolon is a propanal and does not pigment aspergill. sent10: the sneak is photochemical if there is something such that that it is an idealist or is a kind of a LEM or both is false. sent11: the aspergill is not a LEM. sent12: if the after-shave is not an idealist then that the megacolon is a vocal or it is a ministrant or both is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent9 -> int1: the after-shave is not a LEM.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the fact that either the aspergill is an idealist or it is a kind of a LEM or both is not correct.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that that it is an idealist and/or is a kind of a LEM does not hold.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__