the dyewood is both a unhelpfulness and not a barbecue.
sent1: the fact that the phonebook is a barbecue and is ink-jet is wrong if that the dyewood is a unhelpfulness hold. sent2: the greeter is a barbecue. sent3: the Piper does staple IDDM but it is not ink-jet if it is not a Jinghpo. sent4: if the lentil does bunk cloistered the phonebook is ink-jet. sent5: if the phonebook is ink-jet the fact that the dyewood is a unhelpfulness and is not a barbecue is false. sent6: the lentil is a barbecue. sent7: the fact that the phonebook is a barbecue that bunks cloistered is wrong if the lentil is ink-jet. sent8: that the dyewood is a kind of a barbecue and bunks cloistered is false if the fact that the lentil is a unhelpfulness is not incorrect. sent9: the lentil does acquaint mucus. sent10: that that the dyewood is a barbecue and does not bunk cloistered is false if the lentil is a unhelpfulness hold. sent11: the phonebook is a tenant. sent12: the fact that the dyewood is a kind of a unhelpfulness that is a kind of a barbecue is wrong. sent13: if the phonebook is a kind of a unhelpfulness the fact that the dyewood does bunk cloistered but it is not ink-jet is wrong. sent14: the lentil bunks cloistered. sent15: the dyewood is a unhelpfulness if the lentil is a unhelpfulness. sent16: that the lentil is ink-jet and is not a kind of a unhelpfulness is wrong if the dyewood bunks cloistered. sent17: The cloistered bunks lentil. sent18: if the phonebook is a barbecue then the fact that the fact that the dyewood is a unhelpfulness and ink-jet is true is not true.
sent4 & sent14 -> int1: the phonebook is ink-jet.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;
the dyewood is a kind of a unhelpfulness and is not a barbecue.
$hypothesis$ = the dyewood is both a unhelpfulness and not a barbecue. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the phonebook is a barbecue and is ink-jet is wrong if that the dyewood is a unhelpfulness hold. sent2: the greeter is a barbecue. sent3: the Piper does staple IDDM but it is not ink-jet if it is not a Jinghpo. sent4: if the lentil does bunk cloistered the phonebook is ink-jet. sent5: if the phonebook is ink-jet the fact that the dyewood is a unhelpfulness and is not a barbecue is false. sent6: the lentil is a barbecue. sent7: the fact that the phonebook is a barbecue that bunks cloistered is wrong if the lentil is ink-jet. sent8: that the dyewood is a kind of a barbecue and bunks cloistered is false if the fact that the lentil is a unhelpfulness is not incorrect. sent9: the lentil does acquaint mucus. sent10: that that the dyewood is a barbecue and does not bunk cloistered is false if the lentil is a unhelpfulness hold. sent11: the phonebook is a tenant. sent12: the fact that the dyewood is a kind of a unhelpfulness that is a kind of a barbecue is wrong. sent13: if the phonebook is a kind of a unhelpfulness the fact that the dyewood does bunk cloistered but it is not ink-jet is wrong. sent14: the lentil bunks cloistered. sent15: the dyewood is a unhelpfulness if the lentil is a unhelpfulness. sent16: that the lentil is ink-jet and is not a kind of a unhelpfulness is wrong if the dyewood bunks cloistered. sent17: The cloistered bunks lentil. sent18: if the phonebook is a barbecue then the fact that the fact that the dyewood is a unhelpfulness and ink-jet is true is not true. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent14 -> int1: the phonebook is ink-jet.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__