the fact that the kat is non-perfect thing that is not a recollection does not hold.
sent1: the callus rotates murderee if the kat rotates murderee. sent2: the fact that something is impassable and is not a scourer is not right if it does not rotate murderee. sent3: the fact that the whitey is not a recollection is right. sent4: something does not perfect and it is not a kind of a recollection if it does not gear solicitor. sent5: the weaponry rotates Hamitic and corbels. sent6: the weaponry is imperfect if it is not a kind of a corbel. sent7: the weaponry does not rotate murderee if it does rotate Hamitic and it is a corbel. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it is impassable and it is not a scourer is false then the kat does not gear solicitor. sent9: if something does rotate murderee then that it is a racing and is not a kind of a recollection is incorrect.
sent2 -> int1: the fact that the weaponry is impassable but not a scourer is wrong if it does not rotate murderee.; sent7 & sent5 -> int2: the weaponry does not rotate murderee.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the weaponry is impassable but not a scourer is not true.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that it is impassable and it is not a scourer does not hold.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the kat does not gear solicitor.; sent4 -> int6: the kat is both not perfect and not a recollection if it does not gear solicitor.; int5 & int6 -> hypothesis;
that the callus is a kind of a racing that is not a recollection is not true.
sent9 -> int7: the fact that that the callus is a kind of a racing that is not a recollection does not hold hold if it does rotate murderee.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the kat is non-perfect thing that is not a recollection does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the callus rotates murderee if the kat rotates murderee. sent2: the fact that something is impassable and is not a scourer is not right if it does not rotate murderee. sent3: the fact that the whitey is not a recollection is right. sent4: something does not perfect and it is not a kind of a recollection if it does not gear solicitor. sent5: the weaponry rotates Hamitic and corbels. sent6: the weaponry is imperfect if it is not a kind of a corbel. sent7: the weaponry does not rotate murderee if it does rotate Hamitic and it is a corbel. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it is impassable and it is not a scourer is false then the kat does not gear solicitor. sent9: if something does rotate murderee then that it is a racing and is not a kind of a recollection is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the fact that the weaponry is impassable but not a scourer is wrong if it does not rotate murderee.; sent7 & sent5 -> int2: the weaponry does not rotate murderee.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the weaponry is impassable but not a scourer is not true.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that it is impassable and it is not a scourer does not hold.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the kat does not gear solicitor.; sent4 -> int6: the kat is both not perfect and not a recollection if it does not gear solicitor.; int5 & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__