the tipper is not closed-circuit.
sent1: the calculus is a sharp. sent2: something spoils melanin if it weakens. sent3: the fact that something is both not a evaluator and telluric is true. sent4: if something that is not a kind of a evaluator is not telluric then the calculus does not weaken. sent5: the calculus amplifies Stonehenge and it is sharp. sent6: the dotard spoils melanin if the Sorbian is administrative. sent7: something is a vigilantism if it does spoil melanin. sent8: the tipper is closed-circuit if the mesocarp does amplify Septuagint. sent9: the mesocarp does amplify Septuagint if the dotard is a vigilantism. sent10: something is not a kind of a evaluator. sent11: the calculus does not weaken if something is a evaluator and is not telluric. sent12: if the calculus does not weaken but it does amplify Stonehenge the Sorbian is administrative. sent13: there exists something such that it is both not a evaluator and not telluric. sent14: the calculus is not a Leon and not fitting if the Sorbian does not weaken.
sent13 & sent4 -> int1: that the calculus does not weaken is not wrong.; sent5 -> int2: the calculus does amplify Stonehenge.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the calculus does not weaken but it amplifies Stonehenge.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the Sorbian is administrative.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the dotard does spoil melanin.; sent7 -> int6: the dotard is a kind of a vigilantism if that it spoils melanin is correct.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the dotard is a vigilantism.; int7 & sent9 -> int8: the mesocarp does amplify Septuagint.; int8 & sent8 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that it is not a Leon and it is not fitting.
$hypothesis$ = the tipper is not closed-circuit. ; $context$ = sent1: the calculus is a sharp. sent2: something spoils melanin if it weakens. sent3: the fact that something is both not a evaluator and telluric is true. sent4: if something that is not a kind of a evaluator is not telluric then the calculus does not weaken. sent5: the calculus amplifies Stonehenge and it is sharp. sent6: the dotard spoils melanin if the Sorbian is administrative. sent7: something is a vigilantism if it does spoil melanin. sent8: the tipper is closed-circuit if the mesocarp does amplify Septuagint. sent9: the mesocarp does amplify Septuagint if the dotard is a vigilantism. sent10: something is not a kind of a evaluator. sent11: the calculus does not weaken if something is a evaluator and is not telluric. sent12: if the calculus does not weaken but it does amplify Stonehenge the Sorbian is administrative. sent13: there exists something such that it is both not a evaluator and not telluric. sent14: the calculus is not a Leon and not fitting if the Sorbian does not weaken. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 & sent4 -> int1: that the calculus does not weaken is not wrong.; sent5 -> int2: the calculus does amplify Stonehenge.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the calculus does not weaken but it amplifies Stonehenge.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the Sorbian is administrative.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the dotard does spoil melanin.; sent7 -> int6: the dotard is a kind of a vigilantism if that it spoils melanin is correct.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the dotard is a vigilantism.; int7 & sent9 -> int8: the mesocarp does amplify Septuagint.; int8 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__