the verger does not suffer IRA and it is non-dulled.
sent1: something is patristic and it is a canistel if that it is not autodidactic is not wrong. sent2: the magus is not a sociability but autodidactic. sent3: something does not suffer IRA and is non-dulled if the fact that it does not dope is not wrong. sent4: if that the carper does not suffer IRA is correct then that the fact that the verger does not suffer IRA and it is not dulled does not hold hold. sent5: if something is not a dope the polluter does suffer bawdry. sent6: that the fact that the verger suffers slop and is a kind of a canistel is incorrect is true if it is not patristic. sent7: the vicereine does suffer slop if the polluter suffers bawdry. sent8: something does not suffer slop if the fact that it does suffer slop and is a canistel is not correct. sent9: the fact that the featheredge is not a dope hold. sent10: if the vicereine suffers slop and is patristic then the carper does not suffer IRA. sent11: if the magus is not a sociability but it is autodidactic then the vicereine is not autodidactic.
sent9 -> int1: something is not a dope.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the polluter does suffer bawdry.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the vicereine suffers slop.; sent1 -> int4: the vicereine is patristic and it is a canistel if it is not autodidactic.; sent11 & sent2 -> int5: the vicereine is not autodidactic.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the vicereine is patristic and it is a kind of a canistel.; int6 -> int7: the vicereine is patristic.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the vicereine suffers slop and is patristic.; int8 & sent10 -> int9: the carper does not suffer IRA.; int9 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the verger does not suffer IRA and it does not dull.
sent3 -> int10: if the verger is not a dope it does not suffer IRA and does not dull.; sent8 -> int11: if that the verger suffers slop and is a kind of a canistel is false it does not suffers slop.;
$hypothesis$ = the verger does not suffer IRA and it is non-dulled. ; $context$ = sent1: something is patristic and it is a canistel if that it is not autodidactic is not wrong. sent2: the magus is not a sociability but autodidactic. sent3: something does not suffer IRA and is non-dulled if the fact that it does not dope is not wrong. sent4: if that the carper does not suffer IRA is correct then that the fact that the verger does not suffer IRA and it is not dulled does not hold hold. sent5: if something is not a dope the polluter does suffer bawdry. sent6: that the fact that the verger suffers slop and is a kind of a canistel is incorrect is true if it is not patristic. sent7: the vicereine does suffer slop if the polluter suffers bawdry. sent8: something does not suffer slop if the fact that it does suffer slop and is a canistel is not correct. sent9: the fact that the featheredge is not a dope hold. sent10: if the vicereine suffers slop and is patristic then the carper does not suffer IRA. sent11: if the magus is not a sociability but it is autodidactic then the vicereine is not autodidactic. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> int1: something is not a dope.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the polluter does suffer bawdry.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the vicereine suffers slop.; sent1 -> int4: the vicereine is patristic and it is a canistel if it is not autodidactic.; sent11 & sent2 -> int5: the vicereine is not autodidactic.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the vicereine is patristic and it is a kind of a canistel.; int6 -> int7: the vicereine is patristic.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the vicereine suffers slop and is patristic.; int8 & sent10 -> int9: the carper does not suffer IRA.; int9 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__