the insider is steady.
sent1: if something is a kind of a papaverine then the hiatus is a kind of a papaverine. sent2: that the hiatus is zodiacal and it drains is incorrect if the scape is not a kind of a drains. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is not a lizardfish and is not a bilabial is not correct. sent4: something is not a drained if it is sensorineural and is sclerotic. sent5: if that the hiatus is not zodiacal but it is sclerotic is not true the scape is not a kind of a papaverine. sent6: the hiatus is not a papaverine if the fact that it is zodiacal and it is a drained is not correct. sent7: if something does not direct decorativeness it is both not unsteady and zodiacal. sent8: if the scape is sensorineural and sclerotic then it is not a drained. sent9: if the hiatus does not drain then it is not a papaverine. sent10: the fact that something is a kind of a drained but it is not a papaverine is not correct if it is not zodiacal. sent11: the featherfoil is not sclerotic if the hiatus is not a kind of a drained and it is not a kind of a papaverine. sent12: if there exists something such that that it is not a lizardfish and it is not a kind of a bilabial is incorrect the hiatus is a lizardfish. sent13: something does not drain if it is both non-sensorineural and not non-sclerotic. sent14: the hiatus is a kind of a papaverine if there is something such that it does direct decorativeness and/or it is a papaverine. sent15: if something is both a lizardfish and mobile then it does not direct decorativeness. sent16: the hiatus is a mobile if the insider brooches Pinot. sent17: the insider does not steady if the scape is sensorineural. sent18: that the insider is a papaverine and is steady is correct if it is not a drained. sent19: the scape is not sensorineural. sent20: something directs decorativeness and/or is a kind of a papaverine. sent21: something directs decorativeness and is not zodiacal if it is not a kind of a mobile. sent22: the insider is unsteady if that the scape is both not sensorineural and sclerotic is not correct. sent23: the stress does brooch idol. sent24: the fact that the scape is sensorineural thing that is sclerotic is not correct. sent25: that the seaway is both a damages and a protocol is not correct. sent26: there is something such that it does direct debenture or does polymerize or both.
sent13 -> int1: if the scape is not sensorineural but it is sclerotic then it is not a drained.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scape is not sensorineural but it is sclerotic.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the scape is not a drained.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: that the hiatus is zodiacal and it is a drained does not hold.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the hiatus is not a papaverine.; sent20 & sent14 -> int5: the hiatus is a papaverine.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the fact that the scape is not sensorineural but it is sclerotic does not hold.; int7 & sent22 -> hypothesis;
the insider does steady.
$hypothesis$ = the insider is steady. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a kind of a papaverine then the hiatus is a kind of a papaverine. sent2: that the hiatus is zodiacal and it drains is incorrect if the scape is not a kind of a drains. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is not a lizardfish and is not a bilabial is not correct. sent4: something is not a drained if it is sensorineural and is sclerotic. sent5: if that the hiatus is not zodiacal but it is sclerotic is not true the scape is not a kind of a papaverine. sent6: the hiatus is not a papaverine if the fact that it is zodiacal and it is a drained is not correct. sent7: if something does not direct decorativeness it is both not unsteady and zodiacal. sent8: if the scape is sensorineural and sclerotic then it is not a drained. sent9: if the hiatus does not drain then it is not a papaverine. sent10: the fact that something is a kind of a drained but it is not a papaverine is not correct if it is not zodiacal. sent11: the featherfoil is not sclerotic if the hiatus is not a kind of a drained and it is not a kind of a papaverine. sent12: if there exists something such that that it is not a lizardfish and it is not a kind of a bilabial is incorrect the hiatus is a lizardfish. sent13: something does not drain if it is both non-sensorineural and not non-sclerotic. sent14: the hiatus is a kind of a papaverine if there is something such that it does direct decorativeness and/or it is a papaverine. sent15: if something is both a lizardfish and mobile then it does not direct decorativeness. sent16: the hiatus is a mobile if the insider brooches Pinot. sent17: the insider does not steady if the scape is sensorineural. sent18: that the insider is a papaverine and is steady is correct if it is not a drained. sent19: the scape is not sensorineural. sent20: something directs decorativeness and/or is a kind of a papaverine. sent21: something directs decorativeness and is not zodiacal if it is not a kind of a mobile. sent22: the insider is unsteady if that the scape is both not sensorineural and sclerotic is not correct. sent23: the stress does brooch idol. sent24: the fact that the scape is sensorineural thing that is sclerotic is not correct. sent25: that the seaway is both a damages and a protocol is not correct. sent26: there is something such that it does direct debenture or does polymerize or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 -> int1: if the scape is not sensorineural but it is sclerotic then it is not a drained.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scape is not sensorineural but it is sclerotic.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the scape is not a drained.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: that the hiatus is zodiacal and it is a drained does not hold.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the hiatus is not a papaverine.; sent20 & sent14 -> int5: the hiatus is a papaverine.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the fact that the scape is not sensorineural but it is sclerotic does not hold.; int7 & sent22 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__