the endosteum is not operational.
sent1: the adducer is an exhibition if the wiseacre does love. sent2: if something does not mortify then it either is a kind of an exhibition or does love or both. sent3: if the wiseacre is an exhibition that the adducer is an exhibition hold. sent4: that something is both not a sayeret and not an exhibition does not hold if it is not a kind of a damascene. sent5: if something does not habit arthrography then it does not mortify. sent6: the fact that the adducer is both not a sayeret and a damascene does not hold if it is an exhibition. sent7: the fact that the alp is not a kind of a sanitation and is low-interest is not correct if there exists something such that the fact that it is amitotic is not wrong. sent8: the wiseacre is Zambian and is economical if the alp is not bisectional. sent9: if something is not economical then it is not a sayeret and it is not an exhibition. sent10: if something is not indirect then it does not mortify. sent11: something is operational if that it does not direct and it is not a loving is incorrect. sent12: something does not mortify if that it is not a snatcher and does habit arthrography is incorrect. sent13: if the adducer is not a kind of a snatcher and habits arthrography then it is not a kind of a damascene. sent14: if the adducer is not a damascene the fact that it is a sayeret and not an exhibition is wrong. sent15: if the fact that something is not a kind of a sanitation but it is not non-low-interest is incorrect that it is non-bisectional is correct. sent16: the adducer is not economical. sent17: if the adducer is not a kind of a damascene the fact that it is not a sayeret and it is a kind of an exhibition is not true. sent18: if the adducer does not mortify the fact that the endosteum is a kind of non-direct thing that is not a loving is not true. sent19: the fact that the wrasse is amitotic is correct. sent20: if something does direct that it is operational is not wrong. sent21: the adducer does habit arthrography.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the adducer is not a snatcher and habits arthrography.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the adducer is not a damascene.; sent4 -> int2: that the adducer is both not a sayeret and not an exhibition is false if it is not a kind of a damascene.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that that the adducer is not a sayeret and not an exhibition is not false is not correct.; sent9 -> int4: if the adducer is not economical then it is not a sayeret and is not an exhibition.; int4 & sent16 -> int5: the adducer is not a sayeret and is not an exhibition.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the adducer is not a kind of a snatcher and does habit arthrography is not true.; sent12 -> int8: if the fact that the adducer is not a kind of a snatcher and does habit arthrography does not hold then the fact that it does not mortify hold.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the adducer does not mortify.; int9 & sent18 -> int10: the fact that the endosteum is indirect thing that does not love is not correct.; sent11 -> int11: the fact that if that the endosteum does not direct and it is not the loving is wrong the endosteum is operational is not incorrect.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis;
the endosteum is not operational.
sent2 -> int12: the wiseacre either is a kind of an exhibition or is a loving or both if it does not mortify.; sent10 -> int13: the wiseacre does not mortify if it does direct.; sent15 -> int14: if that the alp is not a sanitation but it is low-interest is not true it is not bisectional.; sent19 -> int15: there exists something such that it is not non-amitotic.; int15 & sent7 -> int16: the fact that the fact that the alp is not a sanitation but it is low-interest is true is incorrect.; int14 & int16 -> int17: the alp is not bisectional.; sent8 & int17 -> int18: the wiseacre is not non-Zambian and not non-economical.; int18 -> int19: that the wiseacre is economical hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the endosteum is not operational. ; $context$ = sent1: the adducer is an exhibition if the wiseacre does love. sent2: if something does not mortify then it either is a kind of an exhibition or does love or both. sent3: if the wiseacre is an exhibition that the adducer is an exhibition hold. sent4: that something is both not a sayeret and not an exhibition does not hold if it is not a kind of a damascene. sent5: if something does not habit arthrography then it does not mortify. sent6: the fact that the adducer is both not a sayeret and a damascene does not hold if it is an exhibition. sent7: the fact that the alp is not a kind of a sanitation and is low-interest is not correct if there exists something such that the fact that it is amitotic is not wrong. sent8: the wiseacre is Zambian and is economical if the alp is not bisectional. sent9: if something is not economical then it is not a sayeret and it is not an exhibition. sent10: if something is not indirect then it does not mortify. sent11: something is operational if that it does not direct and it is not a loving is incorrect. sent12: something does not mortify if that it is not a snatcher and does habit arthrography is incorrect. sent13: if the adducer is not a kind of a snatcher and habits arthrography then it is not a kind of a damascene. sent14: if the adducer is not a damascene the fact that it is a sayeret and not an exhibition is wrong. sent15: if the fact that something is not a kind of a sanitation but it is not non-low-interest is incorrect that it is non-bisectional is correct. sent16: the adducer is not economical. sent17: if the adducer is not a kind of a damascene the fact that it is not a sayeret and it is a kind of an exhibition is not true. sent18: if the adducer does not mortify the fact that the endosteum is a kind of non-direct thing that is not a loving is not true. sent19: the fact that the wrasse is amitotic is correct. sent20: if something does direct that it is operational is not wrong. sent21: the adducer does habit arthrography. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the adducer is not a snatcher and habits arthrography.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the adducer is not a damascene.; sent4 -> int2: that the adducer is both not a sayeret and not an exhibition is false if it is not a kind of a damascene.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that that the adducer is not a sayeret and not an exhibition is not false is not correct.; sent9 -> int4: if the adducer is not economical then it is not a sayeret and is not an exhibition.; int4 & sent16 -> int5: the adducer is not a sayeret and is not an exhibition.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the adducer is not a kind of a snatcher and does habit arthrography is not true.; sent12 -> int8: if the fact that the adducer is not a kind of a snatcher and does habit arthrography does not hold then the fact that it does not mortify hold.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the adducer does not mortify.; int9 & sent18 -> int10: the fact that the endosteum is indirect thing that does not love is not correct.; sent11 -> int11: the fact that if that the endosteum does not direct and it is not the loving is wrong the endosteum is operational is not incorrect.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__