the fact that the damper does cloy stardom but it is not an acronym is not true.
sent1: something is a kind of an indium that is a Nycticorax if it does not underquote Oppenheimer. sent2: if the schoolboy does not cloy stardom the damper does cloy stardom and is not an acronym. sent3: that the schoolboy is angiospermous and does credit does not hold. sent4: the fact that the Walkman is not angiospermous is correct. sent5: the fact that the schoolboy does not cloy stardom is true if it is not angiospermous. sent6: if the fact that something either does not cloy stardom or approbates Cinclidae or both is wrong then it is not an acronym. sent7: the schoolboy is not Prakritic. sent8: if the fact that the great-nephew is a responsiveness and does underquote Oppenheimer is not correct then that it does not underquote Oppenheimer is not incorrect. sent9: the fact that if that something cloys stardom and is angiospermous is not correct it is not an acronym is not wrong. sent10: if the schoolboy does not cloy stardom the damper cloy stardom. sent11: the fact that something cloys stardom but it is not a kind of an acronym is incorrect if it does not approbate Cinclidae. sent12: if something is not angiospermous it does not cloy stardom. sent13: something is endoparasitic if it is Prakritic. sent14: if the fact that something is angiospermous and it is a kind of a credit is not right it does not cloy stardom. sent15: if the wordsmith is not an acronym that the damper is a kind of a myology and is angiospermous does not hold. sent16: the damper cloys stardom. sent17: the fact that the great-nephew is a kind of a responsiveness and underquotes Oppenheimer is not correct. sent18: the fact that the fact that something does not cloy stardom and/or approbates Cinclidae is not incorrect is wrong if it is endoparasitic.
sent14 -> int1: if that the schoolboy is angiospermous and it credits does not hold it does not cloy stardom.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the schoolboy does not cloy stardom.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
that the damper is both a myology and angiospermous is not correct.
sent6 -> int3: the wordsmith is not a kind of an acronym if that it does not cloy stardom and/or it approbates Cinclidae is false.; sent18 -> int4: if the wordsmith is endoparasitic then that it either does not cloy stardom or approbates Cinclidae or both is not true.; sent13 -> int5: if the wordsmith is Prakritic then it is endoparasitic.; sent1 -> int6: the great-nephew is an indium and is a Nycticorax if it does not underquote Oppenheimer.; sent8 & sent17 -> int7: the great-nephew does not underquote Oppenheimer.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the great-nephew is a kind of an indium and it is a Nycticorax.; int8 -> int9: something is an indium and it is a Nycticorax.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the damper does cloy stardom but it is not an acronym is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of an indium that is a Nycticorax if it does not underquote Oppenheimer. sent2: if the schoolboy does not cloy stardom the damper does cloy stardom and is not an acronym. sent3: that the schoolboy is angiospermous and does credit does not hold. sent4: the fact that the Walkman is not angiospermous is correct. sent5: the fact that the schoolboy does not cloy stardom is true if it is not angiospermous. sent6: if the fact that something either does not cloy stardom or approbates Cinclidae or both is wrong then it is not an acronym. sent7: the schoolboy is not Prakritic. sent8: if the fact that the great-nephew is a responsiveness and does underquote Oppenheimer is not correct then that it does not underquote Oppenheimer is not incorrect. sent9: the fact that if that something cloys stardom and is angiospermous is not correct it is not an acronym is not wrong. sent10: if the schoolboy does not cloy stardom the damper cloy stardom. sent11: the fact that something cloys stardom but it is not a kind of an acronym is incorrect if it does not approbate Cinclidae. sent12: if something is not angiospermous it does not cloy stardom. sent13: something is endoparasitic if it is Prakritic. sent14: if the fact that something is angiospermous and it is a kind of a credit is not right it does not cloy stardom. sent15: if the wordsmith is not an acronym that the damper is a kind of a myology and is angiospermous does not hold. sent16: the damper cloys stardom. sent17: the fact that the great-nephew is a kind of a responsiveness and underquotes Oppenheimer is not correct. sent18: the fact that the fact that something does not cloy stardom and/or approbates Cinclidae is not incorrect is wrong if it is endoparasitic. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: if that the schoolboy is angiospermous and it credits does not hold it does not cloy stardom.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the schoolboy does not cloy stardom.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__