the furring is not worse.
sent1: the splicer is a cementite if the sporophyll is curricular. sent2: the fact that something is not uneventful and is not appellate is not correct if it cobbles. sent3: if the furring is not non-appellate it is not a worse. sent4: if the splicer is a kind of a cementite the approach is a kind of a worse. sent5: if that something is not uneventful and it is not appellate is incorrect then the fact that it is not a worse hold. sent6: the fact that the furring is eventful and appellate is incorrect if it is a kind of a cobble. sent7: the furring is a Nixon and it is a cobble. sent8: if the salesgirl is both Donatist and not curricular the sporophyll is curricular. sent9: the salesgirl is a xerophyte and it is top-down if it is not a radiobiologist. sent10: the fact that the splicer is both appellate and a cementite does not hold. sent11: if the fact that something is not uneventful and it is not a Nixon is not true it is not appellate. sent12: if something is appellate then it is not a kind of a worse. sent13: something is a kind of Donatist thing that is not curricular if it is a xerophyte. sent14: if something is not a cobble but uneventful the fact that it is a Nixon is correct. sent15: that the hemiplegic is non-appellate and it is not an aesthetic is not correct if it is a slob. sent16: the furring is a Nixon. sent17: the splicer is not appellate if the fact that it is appellate a cementite is not right. sent18: if something does cobble then the fact that it is not uneventful and it is appellate does not hold. sent19: the fact that the furring is a kind of non-uneventful thing that does not taste splicer is wrong. sent20: the furring is appellate if the approach is appellate. sent21: the fact that the fact that the furring is not uneventful but it is appellate does not hold is not incorrect. sent22: the furring is an instrument. sent23: if the furring is not non-appellate the schlep does not cobble but it is uneventful.
sent7 -> int1: the furring is a cobble.; sent2 -> int2: if the furring cobbles then that it is not uneventful and it is not appellate is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the furring is both not uneventful and not appellate is incorrect.; sent5 -> int4: the fact that the furring is not the worse if that that the furring is eventful thing that is not appellate is not true is right is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;
the furring is a kind of a worse.
sent17 & sent10 -> int5: the splicer is not appellate.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it is not appellate.;
$hypothesis$ = the furring is not worse. ; $context$ = sent1: the splicer is a cementite if the sporophyll is curricular. sent2: the fact that something is not uneventful and is not appellate is not correct if it cobbles. sent3: if the furring is not non-appellate it is not a worse. sent4: if the splicer is a kind of a cementite the approach is a kind of a worse. sent5: if that something is not uneventful and it is not appellate is incorrect then the fact that it is not a worse hold. sent6: the fact that the furring is eventful and appellate is incorrect if it is a kind of a cobble. sent7: the furring is a Nixon and it is a cobble. sent8: if the salesgirl is both Donatist and not curricular the sporophyll is curricular. sent9: the salesgirl is a xerophyte and it is top-down if it is not a radiobiologist. sent10: the fact that the splicer is both appellate and a cementite does not hold. sent11: if the fact that something is not uneventful and it is not a Nixon is not true it is not appellate. sent12: if something is appellate then it is not a kind of a worse. sent13: something is a kind of Donatist thing that is not curricular if it is a xerophyte. sent14: if something is not a cobble but uneventful the fact that it is a Nixon is correct. sent15: that the hemiplegic is non-appellate and it is not an aesthetic is not correct if it is a slob. sent16: the furring is a Nixon. sent17: the splicer is not appellate if the fact that it is appellate a cementite is not right. sent18: if something does cobble then the fact that it is not uneventful and it is appellate does not hold. sent19: the fact that the furring is a kind of non-uneventful thing that does not taste splicer is wrong. sent20: the furring is appellate if the approach is appellate. sent21: the fact that the fact that the furring is not uneventful but it is appellate does not hold is not incorrect. sent22: the furring is an instrument. sent23: if the furring is not non-appellate the schlep does not cobble but it is uneventful. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: the furring is a cobble.; sent2 -> int2: if the furring cobbles then that it is not uneventful and it is not appellate is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the furring is both not uneventful and not appellate is incorrect.; sent5 -> int4: the fact that the furring is not the worse if that that the furring is eventful thing that is not appellate is not true is right is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__