the fact that the Ofo is a abstractness and it is a ocher is wrong.
sent1: that something does intrigue escutcheon and it is a foliation is false if that it does not lap perspicuity is not wrong. sent2: if the Ofo is metacentric then it is a ocher. sent3: the sonneteer is a H if that it does not intrigue Cleveland and is not bathyal does not hold. sent4: if something does not intrigue escutcheon then the fact that it is an epilepsy and not Gibraltarian is false. sent5: if something is non-nonfictional thing that is not a foliation that it does not intrigue escutcheon is right. sent6: the Ofo is metacentric if the fact that the Loestrin does lap perspicuity is not incorrect. sent7: that there exists something such that it is bathyal hold. sent8: the venom is a ocher if the Loestrin is not a ocher and/or is not nonfictional. sent9: if the conch laps perspicuity then that the Loestrin is non-nonfictional thing that is not a foliation is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the Loestrin does lap perspicuity hold if it is a foliation. sent11: that the Ofo does not intrigue preparation is not wrong if it is not a H. sent12: if that something intrigues escutcheon and it is a foliation is not correct then it is not a ocher. sent13: that the Andorran is an epilepsy and it is a Gibraltarian is incorrect if that it does not intrigue escutcheon is not false. sent14: The escutcheon does not intrigue Andorran. sent15: the Ofo is not a H or does not intrigue Cleveland or both if something is bathyal. sent16: if the Loestrin is nonfictional it is a foliation. sent17: the fact that the sonneteer does not intrigue Cleveland and is not bathyal is not correct. sent18: that something is metacentric and does not intrigue preparation is not correct if it is a H. sent19: that something is a kind of a foliation but it does not intrigue escutcheon is not correct if the fact that it is not nonfictional is not false. sent20: the Andorran does not intrigue escutcheon. sent21: the Ofo is a kind of a abstractness. sent22: the Loestrin is nonfictional if that the Andorran is an epilepsy but it is not a kind of a Gibraltarian is not right. sent23: something that does not intrigue preparation is both a abstractness and metacentric.
sent4 -> int1: if the Andorran does not intrigue escutcheon the fact that it is an epilepsy but not Gibraltarian does not hold.; int1 & sent20 -> int2: that the Andorran is a kind of an epilepsy that is not Gibraltarian is wrong.; int2 & sent22 -> int3: the Loestrin is nonfictional.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: the Loestrin is a foliation.; int4 & sent10 -> int5: the Loestrin laps perspicuity.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the Ofo is metacentric.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the Ofo is a ocher.; int7 & sent21 -> hypothesis;
the venom is a ocher.
sent12 -> int8: the Loestrin is not a kind of a ocher if the fact that it does intrigue escutcheon and it is a foliation is not correct.; sent1 -> int9: the fact that the Loestrin does intrigue escutcheon and is a kind of a foliation is not true if it does not lap perspicuity.; sent23 -> int10: if the Ofo does not intrigue preparation it is a kind of a abstractness and it is metacentric.; sent7 & sent15 -> int11: the Ofo is not a H and/or it does not intrigue Cleveland.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Ofo is a abstractness and it is a ocher is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does intrigue escutcheon and it is a foliation is false if that it does not lap perspicuity is not wrong. sent2: if the Ofo is metacentric then it is a ocher. sent3: the sonneteer is a H if that it does not intrigue Cleveland and is not bathyal does not hold. sent4: if something does not intrigue escutcheon then the fact that it is an epilepsy and not Gibraltarian is false. sent5: if something is non-nonfictional thing that is not a foliation that it does not intrigue escutcheon is right. sent6: the Ofo is metacentric if the fact that the Loestrin does lap perspicuity is not incorrect. sent7: that there exists something such that it is bathyal hold. sent8: the venom is a ocher if the Loestrin is not a ocher and/or is not nonfictional. sent9: if the conch laps perspicuity then that the Loestrin is non-nonfictional thing that is not a foliation is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the Loestrin does lap perspicuity hold if it is a foliation. sent11: that the Ofo does not intrigue preparation is not wrong if it is not a H. sent12: if that something intrigues escutcheon and it is a foliation is not correct then it is not a ocher. sent13: that the Andorran is an epilepsy and it is a Gibraltarian is incorrect if that it does not intrigue escutcheon is not false. sent14: The escutcheon does not intrigue Andorran. sent15: the Ofo is not a H or does not intrigue Cleveland or both if something is bathyal. sent16: if the Loestrin is nonfictional it is a foliation. sent17: the fact that the sonneteer does not intrigue Cleveland and is not bathyal is not correct. sent18: that something is metacentric and does not intrigue preparation is not correct if it is a H. sent19: that something is a kind of a foliation but it does not intrigue escutcheon is not correct if the fact that it is not nonfictional is not false. sent20: the Andorran does not intrigue escutcheon. sent21: the Ofo is a kind of a abstractness. sent22: the Loestrin is nonfictional if that the Andorran is an epilepsy but it is not a kind of a Gibraltarian is not right. sent23: something that does not intrigue preparation is both a abstractness and metacentric. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: if the Andorran does not intrigue escutcheon the fact that it is an epilepsy but not Gibraltarian does not hold.; int1 & sent20 -> int2: that the Andorran is a kind of an epilepsy that is not Gibraltarian is wrong.; int2 & sent22 -> int3: the Loestrin is nonfictional.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: the Loestrin is a foliation.; int4 & sent10 -> int5: the Loestrin laps perspicuity.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the Ofo is metacentric.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the Ofo is a ocher.; int7 & sent21 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__