that the centrifuge is splenic is not incorrect.
sent1: that the reflectometer is non-exuvial thing that is not splenic is not correct. sent2: the fact that the centrifuge is not a kind of a amrinone and does laicize re-introduction is not correct. sent3: the fact that the centrifuge is a kind of a amrinone that does not laicize re-introduction does not hold. sent4: if that something is not a kind of a amrinone and it does not laicize re-introduction is incorrect then it is not splenic. sent5: the legatee is entozoan if something that is not a Opisthobranchia does laicize zinc. sent6: if the monomaniac does not surmise then the trombiculid does not laicize copywriter. sent7: the monomaniac does not surmise if it is monovalent. sent8: the Muller does vacate Norn if the fact that the trombiculid is Hispanic but it does not vacate Norn is not correct. sent9: if the Muller vacates Norn then the copywriter does vacates Norn. sent10: if there is something such that that it either is a canopy or is not impressionable or both is not true then the compote is inboard. sent11: something is a superior if it is entozoan. sent12: if something is inboard it does inherit. sent13: there is nothing such that it is a amrinone that does not laicize re-introduction. sent14: if the father is glandular but it does not inherit then the centrifuge is splenic. sent15: if the copywriter vacates Norn it is not a kind of a Opisthobranchia and laicizes zinc. sent16: there is nothing that is not a amrinone and does not laicize re-introduction. sent17: that something is not a amrinone and it is not a bacchante is not right if it is not splenic. sent18: the compote is inboard. sent19: if something does not laicize copywriter then that it is Hispanic and does not vacate Norn does not hold. sent20: the fact that something is a canopy and/or it is not impressionable is not right if it is a superior. sent21: the monomaniac is monovalent. sent22: there is nothing such that it is not a amrinone and it does laicize re-introduction.
sent16 -> int1: the fact that the centrifuge is not a kind of a amrinone and does not laicize re-introduction does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: if that the centrifuge is not a amrinone and it does not laicize re-introduction is not right then it is not splenic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;
the centrifuge is splenic.
sent20 -> int3: that either the legatee canopies or it is not impressionable or both is false if it is a superior.; sent11 -> int4: if the legatee is entozoan it is a kind of a superior.; sent19 -> int5: that the trombiculid is a Hispanic and does not vacate Norn does not hold if it does not laicize copywriter.; sent7 & sent21 -> int6: the monomaniac does not surmise.; sent6 & int6 -> int7: the trombiculid does not laicize copywriter.; int5 & int7 -> int8: that the trombiculid is a Hispanic but it does not vacate Norn is wrong.; sent8 & int8 -> int9: the Muller does vacate Norn.; sent9 & int9 -> int10: the copywriter does vacate Norn.; sent15 & int10 -> int11: the copywriter is not a Opisthobranchia and does laicize zinc.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that it is not a Opisthobranchia and laicizes zinc.; int12 & sent5 -> int13: the legatee is entozoan.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the legatee is a kind of a superior.; int3 & int14 -> int15: that the legatee is a canopy and/or is not impressionable does not hold.; int15 -> int16: there is something such that that it is a canopy and/or it is not impressionable is incorrect.; int16 & sent10 -> int17: the compote is inboard.; int17 -> int18: something is inboard.;
$hypothesis$ = that the centrifuge is splenic is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the reflectometer is non-exuvial thing that is not splenic is not correct. sent2: the fact that the centrifuge is not a kind of a amrinone and does laicize re-introduction is not correct. sent3: the fact that the centrifuge is a kind of a amrinone that does not laicize re-introduction does not hold. sent4: if that something is not a kind of a amrinone and it does not laicize re-introduction is incorrect then it is not splenic. sent5: the legatee is entozoan if something that is not a Opisthobranchia does laicize zinc. sent6: if the monomaniac does not surmise then the trombiculid does not laicize copywriter. sent7: the monomaniac does not surmise if it is monovalent. sent8: the Muller does vacate Norn if the fact that the trombiculid is Hispanic but it does not vacate Norn is not correct. sent9: if the Muller vacates Norn then the copywriter does vacates Norn. sent10: if there is something such that that it either is a canopy or is not impressionable or both is not true then the compote is inboard. sent11: something is a superior if it is entozoan. sent12: if something is inboard it does inherit. sent13: there is nothing such that it is a amrinone that does not laicize re-introduction. sent14: if the father is glandular but it does not inherit then the centrifuge is splenic. sent15: if the copywriter vacates Norn it is not a kind of a Opisthobranchia and laicizes zinc. sent16: there is nothing that is not a amrinone and does not laicize re-introduction. sent17: that something is not a amrinone and it is not a bacchante is not right if it is not splenic. sent18: the compote is inboard. sent19: if something does not laicize copywriter then that it is Hispanic and does not vacate Norn does not hold. sent20: the fact that something is a canopy and/or it is not impressionable is not right if it is a superior. sent21: the monomaniac is monovalent. sent22: there is nothing such that it is not a amrinone and it does laicize re-introduction. ; $proof$ = 
sent16 -> int1: the fact that the centrifuge is not a kind of a amrinone and does not laicize re-introduction does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: if that the centrifuge is not a amrinone and it does not laicize re-introduction is not right then it is not splenic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__