the junkyard does not palatalize baseball.
sent1: if the outfitter is not an editor that the fact that the baseball is not a kind of an editor and is virulent is not correct is not wrong. sent2: the baseball is not an editor if somethings are not virulent. sent3: the owner does lecture miller if the fact that the baseball is not an editor and is virulent is not correct. sent4: if the outfitter is a kind of an editor the harpooner is omnidirectional. sent5: something does palatalize baseball if it is piscine. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is fossil and omnidirectional is not right. sent7: the fact that if there exists something such that that it is fossil thing that is omnidirectional is wrong then the harpooner is omnidirectional is true. sent8: something does not lecture mayoress and is not diatonic if it does lecture miller. sent9: the junkyard is piscine if the owner does not lecture mayoress and is not diatonic. sent10: the owner does palatalize baseball if that the outfitter is not a kind of an editor but it is diatonic is not true. sent11: if the junkyard is virulent the baseball does palatalize baseball.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the outfitter is a kind of an editor.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the harpooner is omnidirectional.; sent6 & sent7 -> int2: the harpooner is not omnidirectional.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the outfitter is not an editor hold.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the fact that the baseball is not an editor but it is virulent is false.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the owner does lecture miller.; sent8 -> int7: if the owner lectures miller then it does not lecture mayoress and it is not diatonic.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the owner does not lecture mayoress and it is not diatonic.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the junkyard is piscine.; sent5 -> int10: if the junkyard is piscine it does palatalize baseball.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the junkyard does not palatalize baseball. ; $context$ = sent1: if the outfitter is not an editor that the fact that the baseball is not a kind of an editor and is virulent is not correct is not wrong. sent2: the baseball is not an editor if somethings are not virulent. sent3: the owner does lecture miller if the fact that the baseball is not an editor and is virulent is not correct. sent4: if the outfitter is a kind of an editor the harpooner is omnidirectional. sent5: something does palatalize baseball if it is piscine. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is fossil and omnidirectional is not right. sent7: the fact that if there exists something such that that it is fossil thing that is omnidirectional is wrong then the harpooner is omnidirectional is true. sent8: something does not lecture mayoress and is not diatonic if it does lecture miller. sent9: the junkyard is piscine if the owner does not lecture mayoress and is not diatonic. sent10: the owner does palatalize baseball if that the outfitter is not a kind of an editor but it is diatonic is not true. sent11: if the junkyard is virulent the baseball does palatalize baseball. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the outfitter is a kind of an editor.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the harpooner is omnidirectional.; sent6 & sent7 -> int2: the harpooner is not omnidirectional.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the outfitter is not an editor hold.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the fact that the baseball is not an editor but it is virulent is false.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the owner does lecture miller.; sent8 -> int7: if the owner lectures miller then it does not lecture mayoress and it is not diatonic.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the owner does not lecture mayoress and it is not diatonic.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the junkyard is piscine.; sent5 -> int10: if the junkyard is piscine it does palatalize baseball.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__