the vernix is not corrigible.
sent1: the fact that the runaway does deglaze transcendentalism and is not weightless is not correct. sent2: the fact that the kettle is not weightless but it is a kind of a humanity is incorrect. sent3: the runaway does not bar jejunity. sent4: if something is a kind of a humanity then it bars ecobabble. sent5: that the kettle bars ecobabble is not incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that it does not retain and is glottal. sent7: something is popular if it does retain. sent8: there is something such that that it bars jejunity and does deglaze transcendentalism does not hold. sent9: that the vantage is not glottal but it is a humanity is not true if the runaway bars ecobabble. sent10: something is corrigible if it is popular. sent11: if there is something such that that it is not corrigible and retains does not hold the vernix is weightless. sent12: the vantage is a kind of non-glottal thing that is a humanity if the kettle is not a kind of a humanity. sent13: if there exists something such that that it does not bar jejunity and it does bedew autotomy is false the vernix does retain. sent14: if something is glottal then it is weightless. sent15: the vantage is weightless. sent16: the kettle is not a kind of a humanity if it does not bar jejunity and it does bedew autotomy. sent17: if the kettle does retain then the fact that the vernix does bar jejunity and it is popular is not true. sent18: if the kettle is glottal then that the vernix is a kind of non-popular thing that does bedew autotomy is incorrect. sent19: if the fact that the runaway does deglaze transcendentalism and is not weightless is false it does bar ecobabble. sent20: the kettle is not popular. sent21: the kettle deglazes transcendentalism. sent22: if the kettle bars jejunity that the vernix is popular and it does bar ecobabble is not correct. sent23: if the kettle is popular that that the vernix is corrigible and does bedew autotomy is true does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kettle does not bar jejunity but it does bedew autotomy.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the kettle is not a kind of a humanity.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the vantage is a kind of non-glottal a humanity.; sent19 & sent1 -> int3: the runaway bars ecobabble.; sent9 & int3 -> int4: that the vantage is non-glottal thing that is a humanity is not true.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the kettle does not bar jejunity but it does bedew autotomy is wrong.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it does not bar jejunity and bedews autotomy is false.; int7 & sent13 -> int8: the vernix does retain.; sent7 -> int9: if that the vernix retains hold the fact that it is popular hold.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the vernix is popular.; sent10 -> int11: if the vernix is popular then it is corrigible.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the vernix is not corrigible. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the runaway does deglaze transcendentalism and is not weightless is not correct. sent2: the fact that the kettle is not weightless but it is a kind of a humanity is incorrect. sent3: the runaway does not bar jejunity. sent4: if something is a kind of a humanity then it bars ecobabble. sent5: that the kettle bars ecobabble is not incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that it does not retain and is glottal. sent7: something is popular if it does retain. sent8: there is something such that that it bars jejunity and does deglaze transcendentalism does not hold. sent9: that the vantage is not glottal but it is a humanity is not true if the runaway bars ecobabble. sent10: something is corrigible if it is popular. sent11: if there is something such that that it is not corrigible and retains does not hold the vernix is weightless. sent12: the vantage is a kind of non-glottal thing that is a humanity if the kettle is not a kind of a humanity. sent13: if there exists something such that that it does not bar jejunity and it does bedew autotomy is false the vernix does retain. sent14: if something is glottal then it is weightless. sent15: the vantage is weightless. sent16: the kettle is not a kind of a humanity if it does not bar jejunity and it does bedew autotomy. sent17: if the kettle does retain then the fact that the vernix does bar jejunity and it is popular is not true. sent18: if the kettle is glottal then that the vernix is a kind of non-popular thing that does bedew autotomy is incorrect. sent19: if the fact that the runaway does deglaze transcendentalism and is not weightless is false it does bar ecobabble. sent20: the kettle is not popular. sent21: the kettle deglazes transcendentalism. sent22: if the kettle bars jejunity that the vernix is popular and it does bar ecobabble is not correct. sent23: if the kettle is popular that that the vernix is corrigible and does bedew autotomy is true does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kettle does not bar jejunity but it does bedew autotomy.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the kettle is not a kind of a humanity.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the vantage is a kind of non-glottal a humanity.; sent19 & sent1 -> int3: the runaway bars ecobabble.; sent9 & int3 -> int4: that the vantage is non-glottal thing that is a humanity is not true.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the kettle does not bar jejunity but it does bedew autotomy is wrong.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it does not bar jejunity and bedews autotomy is false.; int7 & sent13 -> int8: the vernix does retain.; sent7 -> int9: if that the vernix retains hold the fact that it is popular hold.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the vernix is popular.; sent10 -> int11: if the vernix is popular then it is corrigible.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__