the bookshop is not formic but it is astronautic.
sent1: the sketchbook is not precocial. sent2: if the sketchbook impedes Ahriman the fact that the fairway is a kind of non-thermodynamics thing that is precocial is false. sent3: the bookshop is precocial. sent4: the fact that the fairway is not precocial but it is thermodynamics is incorrect. sent5: if the bookshop does impede Ahriman the fact that the sketchbook is not formic and is thermodynamics is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the puzzle is quantal if the sketchbook does impede Ahriman and is precocial is right. sent7: the fact that the bookshop is formic and astronautic does not hold if the fairway is thermodynamics. sent8: that something is a kind of a drupe that is a kind of a foster-child is incorrect if the fact that it does not impede Balsaminaceae is right. sent9: if the puzzle is quantal the fairway is thermodynamics. sent10: the puzzle is Pavlovian. sent11: the puzzle is formic if the bookshop is quantal. sent12: the puzzle does impede Ahriman if the sketchbook is precocial. sent13: the sketchbook does impede Ahriman but it is not precocial. sent14: if the sketchbook impedes Ahriman and is not precocial the puzzle is quantal. sent15: the fact that the bookshop is formic and is astronautic does not hold. sent16: if something is not thermodynamics then it is a kind of non-formic thing that is astronautic. sent17: if the fairway is thermodynamics then that the bookshop is a kind of non-formic thing that is astronautic is not right. sent18: something is not quantal and it is not thermodynamics if it does not refine agrapha. sent19: that the bookshop is not precocial and is astronautic is not true. sent20: if that the puzzle is Pavlovian hold the sketchbook does not impede Balsaminaceae. sent21: if the bookshop is a kind of precocial thing that is not formic then the sketchbook is quantal.
sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the puzzle is quantal.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: the fairway is thermodynamics.; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis;
the bookshop is not formic and is astronautic.
sent16 -> int3: the bookshop is not formic but it is astronautic if it is not thermodynamics.; sent18 -> int4: if the bookshop does not refine agrapha it is not quantal and it is not thermodynamics.; sent8 -> int5: the fact that the sketchbook is a drupe that is a kind of a foster-child does not hold if it does not impede Balsaminaceae.; sent20 & sent10 -> int6: the sketchbook does not impede Balsaminaceae.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the sketchbook is a drupe and a foster-child is not right.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that that it is both a drupe and a foster-child is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the bookshop is not formic but it is astronautic. ; $context$ = sent1: the sketchbook is not precocial. sent2: if the sketchbook impedes Ahriman the fact that the fairway is a kind of non-thermodynamics thing that is precocial is false. sent3: the bookshop is precocial. sent4: the fact that the fairway is not precocial but it is thermodynamics is incorrect. sent5: if the bookshop does impede Ahriman the fact that the sketchbook is not formic and is thermodynamics is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the puzzle is quantal if the sketchbook does impede Ahriman and is precocial is right. sent7: the fact that the bookshop is formic and astronautic does not hold if the fairway is thermodynamics. sent8: that something is a kind of a drupe that is a kind of a foster-child is incorrect if the fact that it does not impede Balsaminaceae is right. sent9: if the puzzle is quantal the fairway is thermodynamics. sent10: the puzzle is Pavlovian. sent11: the puzzle is formic if the bookshop is quantal. sent12: the puzzle does impede Ahriman if the sketchbook is precocial. sent13: the sketchbook does impede Ahriman but it is not precocial. sent14: if the sketchbook impedes Ahriman and is not precocial the puzzle is quantal. sent15: the fact that the bookshop is formic and is astronautic does not hold. sent16: if something is not thermodynamics then it is a kind of non-formic thing that is astronautic. sent17: if the fairway is thermodynamics then that the bookshop is a kind of non-formic thing that is astronautic is not right. sent18: something is not quantal and it is not thermodynamics if it does not refine agrapha. sent19: that the bookshop is not precocial and is astronautic is not true. sent20: if that the puzzle is Pavlovian hold the sketchbook does not impede Balsaminaceae. sent21: if the bookshop is a kind of precocial thing that is not formic then the sketchbook is quantal. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the puzzle is quantal.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: the fairway is thermodynamics.; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__