the fact that that the descendants either is a kind of a bylaw or clashes or both is incorrect hold.
sent1: something that does not deafen Vesalius does not capture seat and does capture transference. sent2: if something is not a clash but it is a bylaw it captures transference. sent3: if something that is exodontics is not a osteologist then it is not a kind of a ground-shaker. sent4: if the fact that something is a schmeer and not a underpart is wrong then the fact that it is not a kind of a schmeer is true. sent5: the descendants captures transference. sent6: if the angiocarp does not capture seat and captures transference the descendants does not captures transference. sent7: there exists something such that it is apostrophic. sent8: that something is a kind of a bylaw or is a kind of a clash or both is false if it does not capture transference. sent9: the burgundy is exodontics thing that is not a osteologist if there is something such that it is apostrophic. sent10: the seat is not a clash but a bylaw if the descendants deafens Vesalius. sent11: the fact that the angiocarp is a schmeer but it is not a underpart is wrong if the burgundy is not a ground-shaker. sent12: the peristyle is unattractive or it does capture tot or both. sent13: the ridley clashes. sent14: the descendants is a bylaw and captures transference. sent15: something does deafen Vesalius or does capture seat or both if it is not a schmeer.
sent14 -> int1: the descendants is a bylaw.; int1 -> hypothesis;
the seat does capture transference.
sent2 -> int2: if the seat does not clash but it is a bylaw it captures transference.; sent15 -> int3: if the angiocarp is not a schmeer either it does deafen Vesalius or it does capture seat or both.; sent4 -> int4: the angiocarp is not a kind of a schmeer if that it is a schmeer that is not a underpart does not hold.; sent3 -> int5: the burgundy is not a ground-shaker if it is exodontics and it is not a osteologist.; sent7 & sent9 -> int6: the burgundy is exodontics thing that is not a osteologist.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the burgundy is not a kind of a ground-shaker is true.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: that the angiocarp is a schmeer but it is not a underpart is not right.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the angiocarp is not a schmeer.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the angiocarp does deafen Vesalius and/or it captures seat.; int10 -> int11: either something deafens Vesalius or it does capture seat or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the descendants either is a kind of a bylaw or clashes or both is incorrect hold. ; $context$ = sent1: something that does not deafen Vesalius does not capture seat and does capture transference. sent2: if something is not a clash but it is a bylaw it captures transference. sent3: if something that is exodontics is not a osteologist then it is not a kind of a ground-shaker. sent4: if the fact that something is a schmeer and not a underpart is wrong then the fact that it is not a kind of a schmeer is true. sent5: the descendants captures transference. sent6: if the angiocarp does not capture seat and captures transference the descendants does not captures transference. sent7: there exists something such that it is apostrophic. sent8: that something is a kind of a bylaw or is a kind of a clash or both is false if it does not capture transference. sent9: the burgundy is exodontics thing that is not a osteologist if there is something such that it is apostrophic. sent10: the seat is not a clash but a bylaw if the descendants deafens Vesalius. sent11: the fact that the angiocarp is a schmeer but it is not a underpart is wrong if the burgundy is not a ground-shaker. sent12: the peristyle is unattractive or it does capture tot or both. sent13: the ridley clashes. sent14: the descendants is a bylaw and captures transference. sent15: something does deafen Vesalius or does capture seat or both if it is not a schmeer. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: the descendants is a bylaw.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__