the menorah is not indexical.
sent1: something does not patronage Schwann and patronages pussy-paw if it does not multiply impecuniousness. sent2: the tempest is not a peptone if the escalator is not a peptone. sent3: something does not unfasten linen but it is a lentil if it does not patronage pussy-paw. sent4: the menorah unfastens linen if there is something such that it is a kind of a Ohioan. sent5: the clawhammer is indexical. sent6: the clawhammer is indexical if there exists something such that that it is a Ohioan and it does not unfasten linen is incorrect. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is phrenological and it is not a Ohioan does not hold then the menorah unfastens linen. sent8: the fact that the clawhammer unfastens linen and is not a Ohioan is not correct. sent9: there is something such that the fact that it is phrenological and it is a Ohioan does not hold. sent10: that the fact that the clawhammer is phrenological and it is a kind of a Ohioan is incorrect is right. sent11: if the blacking does not patronage Schwann and does patronage pussy-paw then the jonquil does not patronage pussy-paw. sent12: something is not non-indexical if it unfastens linen. sent13: the saprobe does not multiply respecter. sent14: that the throstle multiplies impecuniousness and is not a maleate does not hold if the tempest is not a peptone. sent15: that the clawhammer is phrenological and is not a Ohioan is not right. sent16: if the jonquil does not unfasten linen and is a lentil the menorah is not indexical. sent17: if the capacitance is a FDIC and is a peptone then the escalator is not a kind of a peptone. sent18: the capacitance is a FDIC if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a fingerboard or it is alkahestic or both is false. sent19: that the foliation is not a fingerboard and/or is alkahestic is not right. sent20: if the saprobe does not multiply respecter then the capacitance is a peptone that does patronage blacking. sent21: there is something such that it is phrenological and not a Ohioan.
sent15 -> int1: there is something such that that it is a kind of phrenological thing that is not a Ohioan is wrong.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the menorah unfastens linen.; sent12 -> int3: if the menorah does unfasten linen then it is indexical.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;
the menorah is not indexical.
sent3 -> int4: the jonquil does not unfasten linen but it is a lentil if that it does not patronage pussy-paw is correct.; sent1 -> int5: if the blacking does not multiply impecuniousness it does not patronage Schwann and it patronages pussy-paw.; sent19 -> int6: there exists something such that the fact that either it is not a fingerboard or it is alkahestic or both is false.; int6 & sent18 -> int7: the capacitance is a kind of a FDIC.; sent20 & sent13 -> int8: the capacitance is a peptone that patronages blacking.; int8 -> int9: the capacitance is a peptone.; int7 & int9 -> int10: the capacitance is a FDIC and it is a peptone.; sent17 & int10 -> int11: the escalator is not a peptone.; sent2 & int11 -> int12: the tempest is not a peptone.; sent14 & int12 -> int13: that the throstle multiplies impecuniousness and is not a kind of a maleate does not hold.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that the fact that it does multiply impecuniousness and it is not a maleate is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the menorah is not indexical. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not patronage Schwann and patronages pussy-paw if it does not multiply impecuniousness. sent2: the tempest is not a peptone if the escalator is not a peptone. sent3: something does not unfasten linen but it is a lentil if it does not patronage pussy-paw. sent4: the menorah unfastens linen if there is something such that it is a kind of a Ohioan. sent5: the clawhammer is indexical. sent6: the clawhammer is indexical if there exists something such that that it is a Ohioan and it does not unfasten linen is incorrect. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is phrenological and it is not a Ohioan does not hold then the menorah unfastens linen. sent8: the fact that the clawhammer unfastens linen and is not a Ohioan is not correct. sent9: there is something such that the fact that it is phrenological and it is a Ohioan does not hold. sent10: that the fact that the clawhammer is phrenological and it is a kind of a Ohioan is incorrect is right. sent11: if the blacking does not patronage Schwann and does patronage pussy-paw then the jonquil does not patronage pussy-paw. sent12: something is not non-indexical if it unfastens linen. sent13: the saprobe does not multiply respecter. sent14: that the throstle multiplies impecuniousness and is not a maleate does not hold if the tempest is not a peptone. sent15: that the clawhammer is phrenological and is not a Ohioan is not right. sent16: if the jonquil does not unfasten linen and is a lentil the menorah is not indexical. sent17: if the capacitance is a FDIC and is a peptone then the escalator is not a kind of a peptone. sent18: the capacitance is a FDIC if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a fingerboard or it is alkahestic or both is false. sent19: that the foliation is not a fingerboard and/or is alkahestic is not right. sent20: if the saprobe does not multiply respecter then the capacitance is a peptone that does patronage blacking. sent21: there is something such that it is phrenological and not a Ohioan. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 -> int1: there is something such that that it is a kind of phrenological thing that is not a Ohioan is wrong.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the menorah unfastens linen.; sent12 -> int3: if the menorah does unfasten linen then it is indexical.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__