that the camise is life-support is not incorrect.
sent1: everything is not joyless. sent2: something formalizes Garbo and does cohabit if it is not a Sealyham. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is either Kazakhstani or evidentiary or both is false then the fact that the microphage is not a kind of a Rastafarian is right. sent4: if something does not riposte infiltrator but it is joyless then the product is not life-support. sent5: the camise is not a kind of a centralism but it does cohabit. sent6: the fact that the basophil is a Kazakhstani or it is evidentiary or both is not right. sent7: if something that is joyless does riposte infiltrator then the camise is not life-support. sent8: if the pollinator is ahistorical then it is malign. sent9: if that the seine is astronomic but it is not a conflagration is not right the camise is life-support. sent10: if something that is not joyless does riposte infiltrator the camise is not life-support. sent11: the fact that the pollinator is ahistorical hold. sent12: if something is both not non-alvine and not non-malign it is not a Sealyham. sent13: the product is not joyless. sent14: everything is not joyless and it ripostes infiltrator. sent15: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Rastafarian the pollinator dungs. sent16: the pollinator designates and it is not non-alvine. sent17: if the infiltrator is not a kind of a hymenium the fact that the seine is astronomic but it is not a conflagration is not right.
sent14 -> int1: the product is not joyless but it does riposte infiltrator.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is not joyless and does riposte infiltrator.; int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the camise is life-support.
sent2 -> int3: the pollinator formalizes Garbo and it does cohabit if it is not a kind of a Sealyham.; sent12 -> int4: the pollinator is not a kind of a Sealyham if it is alvine and it is malign.; sent16 -> int5: the pollinator is alvine.; sent8 & sent11 -> int6: the fact that that the pollinator is not malign is not incorrect is false.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the pollinator is alvine and is malign.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the pollinator is not a Sealyham.; int3 & int8 -> int9: the pollinator formalizes Garbo and it does cohabit.; int9 -> int10: the pollinator cohabits.; sent6 -> int11: there exists something such that the fact that it is Kazakhstani and/or is evidentiary is wrong.; int11 & sent3 -> int12: the microphage is not a Rastafarian.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it is non-Rastafarian.; int13 & sent15 -> int14: the pollinator dungs.; int10 & int14 -> int15: the pollinator cohabits and dungs.; int15 -> int16: there is something such that it cohabits and dungs.;
$hypothesis$ = that the camise is life-support is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is not joyless. sent2: something formalizes Garbo and does cohabit if it is not a Sealyham. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is either Kazakhstani or evidentiary or both is false then the fact that the microphage is not a kind of a Rastafarian is right. sent4: if something does not riposte infiltrator but it is joyless then the product is not life-support. sent5: the camise is not a kind of a centralism but it does cohabit. sent6: the fact that the basophil is a Kazakhstani or it is evidentiary or both is not right. sent7: if something that is joyless does riposte infiltrator then the camise is not life-support. sent8: if the pollinator is ahistorical then it is malign. sent9: if that the seine is astronomic but it is not a conflagration is not right the camise is life-support. sent10: if something that is not joyless does riposte infiltrator the camise is not life-support. sent11: the fact that the pollinator is ahistorical hold. sent12: if something is both not non-alvine and not non-malign it is not a Sealyham. sent13: the product is not joyless. sent14: everything is not joyless and it ripostes infiltrator. sent15: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Rastafarian the pollinator dungs. sent16: the pollinator designates and it is not non-alvine. sent17: if the infiltrator is not a kind of a hymenium the fact that the seine is astronomic but it is not a conflagration is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: the product is not joyless but it does riposte infiltrator.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is not joyless and does riposte infiltrator.; int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__