the Moro does not bespangle why.
sent1: if the fact that the balbriggan does bespangle why or does scald cruiserweight or both is wrong then the Moro does not bespangle why. sent2: the balbriggan is unfaithful but it does not scald cruiserweight. sent3: either the seller is not a go or it is not a splashboard or both if the Anglican is a splashboard. sent4: the Moro does not destine grama but it does bespangle why if the fact that it is a phalanger is true. sent5: the Moro is a phalanger if the seller is not a splashboard. sent6: if the cruiserweight does not destine grama then the Moro does scald albumin. sent7: the Anglican is clinical. sent8: the Moro is a kind of a phalanger if the seller is not a go. sent9: that the cruiserweight scalds cruiserweight is true if the balbriggan is not clinical. sent10: if the seller does go then the fact that the balbriggan is not unfaithful or does not go or both hold. sent11: if the fact that the cruiserweight is not clinical but it scalds albumin is not correct the Anglican is a kind of a splashboard. sent12: the balbriggan does not scald albumin and/or it is not noncompetitive. sent13: the fact that the cruiserweight is not clinical and does scald albumin is not true if the balbriggan does not scald cruiserweight.
sent2 -> int1: the balbriggan does not scald cruiserweight.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: that the cruiserweight is non-clinical but it scalds albumin is incorrect.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the Anglican is a kind of a splashboard.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the seller is either not a go or not a splashboard or both.; int4 & sent8 & sent5 -> int5: the Moro is a kind of a phalanger.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the Moro does not destine grama but it does bespangle why.; int6 -> hypothesis;
the Moro does not bespangle why.
$hypothesis$ = the Moro does not bespangle why. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the balbriggan does bespangle why or does scald cruiserweight or both is wrong then the Moro does not bespangle why. sent2: the balbriggan is unfaithful but it does not scald cruiserweight. sent3: either the seller is not a go or it is not a splashboard or both if the Anglican is a splashboard. sent4: the Moro does not destine grama but it does bespangle why if the fact that it is a phalanger is true. sent5: the Moro is a phalanger if the seller is not a splashboard. sent6: if the cruiserweight does not destine grama then the Moro does scald albumin. sent7: the Anglican is clinical. sent8: the Moro is a kind of a phalanger if the seller is not a go. sent9: that the cruiserweight scalds cruiserweight is true if the balbriggan is not clinical. sent10: if the seller does go then the fact that the balbriggan is not unfaithful or does not go or both hold. sent11: if the fact that the cruiserweight is not clinical but it scalds albumin is not correct the Anglican is a kind of a splashboard. sent12: the balbriggan does not scald albumin and/or it is not noncompetitive. sent13: the fact that the cruiserweight is not clinical and does scald albumin is not true if the balbriggan does not scald cruiserweight. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the balbriggan does not scald cruiserweight.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: that the cruiserweight is non-clinical but it scalds albumin is incorrect.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the Anglican is a kind of a splashboard.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the seller is either not a go or not a splashboard or both.; int4 & sent8 & sent5 -> int5: the Moro is a kind of a phalanger.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the Moro does not destine grama but it does bespangle why.; int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__