the sparrow is analphabetic.
sent1: if the oilcloth is narial it is not a Riley. sent2: the sparrow is narial. sent3: if something is not narial it is analphabetic and it is a Riley. sent4: if that something is not a pomologist but it does hum preschooler does not hold it is not a welt. sent5: the sparrow is not a kind of a Riley. sent6: that something is narial and it is a kind of a Riley is wrong if the fact that it is not analphabetic is true. sent7: the fact that the oilcloth is not narial and it is not a kind of a scouring does not hold. sent8: the oilcloth is a kind of a Riley if that the sparrow is analphabetic hold. sent9: if that the oilcloth is a kind of non-narial thing that is not a kind of a scouring is not right the fact that it is not a kind of a Riley hold. sent10: the oilcloth is not a kind of a Riley if the fact that it does not devein sympathectomy and does not hymn does not hold. sent11: if the agonist watches stockpile the fact that it does not pry and is not estuarine does not hold. sent12: that the oilcloth is a kind of narial thing that is not a kind of a scouring is not true. sent13: the slide is not a Riley. sent14: if the lancewood does not welt that the oilcloth scours and is narial is wrong. sent15: if the fact that something does not pry and it is not estuarine does not hold it is skinless. sent16: if the agonist is skinless then that the lancewood is not a kind of a pomologist and hums preschooler is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sparrow is analphabetic.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: that the oilcloth is a Riley hold.; sent9 & sent7 -> int2: the oilcloth is not a Riley.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the sparrow is analphabetic.
sent3 -> int4: if the sparrow is not narial it is both analphabetic and a Riley.; sent4 -> int5: if that the lancewood is not a pomologist and hums preschooler is wrong then it is not a welt.; sent15 -> int6: the agonist is skinless if that it does not pry and it is not estuarine does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the sparrow is analphabetic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the oilcloth is narial it is not a Riley. sent2: the sparrow is narial. sent3: if something is not narial it is analphabetic and it is a Riley. sent4: if that something is not a pomologist but it does hum preschooler does not hold it is not a welt. sent5: the sparrow is not a kind of a Riley. sent6: that something is narial and it is a kind of a Riley is wrong if the fact that it is not analphabetic is true. sent7: the fact that the oilcloth is not narial and it is not a kind of a scouring does not hold. sent8: the oilcloth is a kind of a Riley if that the sparrow is analphabetic hold. sent9: if that the oilcloth is a kind of non-narial thing that is not a kind of a scouring is not right the fact that it is not a kind of a Riley hold. sent10: the oilcloth is not a kind of a Riley if the fact that it does not devein sympathectomy and does not hymn does not hold. sent11: if the agonist watches stockpile the fact that it does not pry and is not estuarine does not hold. sent12: that the oilcloth is a kind of narial thing that is not a kind of a scouring is not true. sent13: the slide is not a Riley. sent14: if the lancewood does not welt that the oilcloth scours and is narial is wrong. sent15: if the fact that something does not pry and it is not estuarine does not hold it is skinless. sent16: if the agonist is skinless then that the lancewood is not a kind of a pomologist and hums preschooler is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sparrow is analphabetic.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: that the oilcloth is a Riley hold.; sent9 & sent7 -> int2: the oilcloth is not a Riley.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__