the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger and is not a Sikorsky.
sent1: if that the bayou is a kind of non-questionable thing that abjures criminologist is not true it is questionable. sent2: the jacket is a eatage. sent3: if something does abjure addicted it does not blemish Stavanger and is not a kind of a Sikorsky. sent4: if that the squirter abjures June and is immunochemical is not right then the fact that the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger hold. sent5: if the jacket does not preserve cubism and is autogamous then the tetraskelion does preserve cubism. sent6: that something is not a capercaillie but it is costal hold if it does preserve cubism. sent7: if the ferrimagnetism is not a Sikorsky that the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger and is not a Sikorsky is wrong. sent8: the fact that the bread is a capercaillie and is costal is incorrect if the dodderer does not preserve cubism. sent9: that the ferrimagnetism abjures addicted but it is not a Sikorsky does not hold if that the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that that the squirter does abjure June and it is immunochemical is not right if the bread is not a capercaillie is not incorrect. sent11: either something is a orphrey or it is not a kind of a anthozoan or both. sent12: if something is not a kind of a capercaillie but it is costal then it is not immunochemical. sent13: something is not a capercaillie if that it is a capercaillie and it is costal is not true. sent14: the ferrimagnetism is not a Sikorsky if there is something such that the fact that it does blemish Stavanger is not incorrect. sent15: if the ferrimagnetism is not immunochemical then the diffraction does abjure addicted and it does abjure June. sent16: the differentiation is not a orphrey if that the ferrimagnetism does abjure addicted and is not a Sikorsky is false. sent17: if the tetraskelion does preserve cubism and is a magnification the dodderer does not preserve cubism. sent18: the fact that the bayou is not questionable and does abjure criminologist does not hold. sent19: something that is a eatage does not preserve cubism and is autogamous. sent20: the tetraskelion is a kind of a A-horizon or it is enolic or both if there is something such that it is questionable. sent21: the ferrimagnetism is not a kind of a Sikorsky if something is a orphrey or it is not a anthozoan or both.
sent11 & sent21 -> int1: the ferrimagnetism is not a Sikorsky.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;
the differentiation is not a orphrey.
sent13 -> int2: if the fact that the bread is a capercaillie and costal does not hold then that it is not a capercaillie is not false.; sent19 -> int3: the jacket does not preserve cubism and is not non-autogamous if it is a eatage.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the jacket does not preserve cubism but it is autogamous.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the tetraskelion preserves cubism.; sent1 & sent18 -> int6: the bayou is questionable.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is questionable.; int7 & sent20 -> int8: the tetraskelion either is a kind of a A-horizon or is enolic or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger and is not a Sikorsky. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the bayou is a kind of non-questionable thing that abjures criminologist is not true it is questionable. sent2: the jacket is a eatage. sent3: if something does abjure addicted it does not blemish Stavanger and is not a kind of a Sikorsky. sent4: if that the squirter abjures June and is immunochemical is not right then the fact that the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger hold. sent5: if the jacket does not preserve cubism and is autogamous then the tetraskelion does preserve cubism. sent6: that something is not a capercaillie but it is costal hold if it does preserve cubism. sent7: if the ferrimagnetism is not a Sikorsky that the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger and is not a Sikorsky is wrong. sent8: the fact that the bread is a capercaillie and is costal is incorrect if the dodderer does not preserve cubism. sent9: that the ferrimagnetism abjures addicted but it is not a Sikorsky does not hold if that the diffraction does not blemish Stavanger is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that that the squirter does abjure June and it is immunochemical is not right if the bread is not a capercaillie is not incorrect. sent11: either something is a orphrey or it is not a kind of a anthozoan or both. sent12: if something is not a kind of a capercaillie but it is costal then it is not immunochemical. sent13: something is not a capercaillie if that it is a capercaillie and it is costal is not true. sent14: the ferrimagnetism is not a Sikorsky if there is something such that the fact that it does blemish Stavanger is not incorrect. sent15: if the ferrimagnetism is not immunochemical then the diffraction does abjure addicted and it does abjure June. sent16: the differentiation is not a orphrey if that the ferrimagnetism does abjure addicted and is not a Sikorsky is false. sent17: if the tetraskelion does preserve cubism and is a magnification the dodderer does not preserve cubism. sent18: the fact that the bayou is not questionable and does abjure criminologist does not hold. sent19: something that is a eatage does not preserve cubism and is autogamous. sent20: the tetraskelion is a kind of a A-horizon or it is enolic or both if there is something such that it is questionable. sent21: the ferrimagnetism is not a kind of a Sikorsky if something is a orphrey or it is not a anthozoan or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 & sent21 -> int1: the ferrimagnetism is not a Sikorsky.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__