the handhold is not proteinaceous.
sent1: if the feedlot is psycholinguistics that the handhold is a kind of costive thing that is not nonlexical is not true. sent2: if something is not a gangrene then that the bang is both nonlexical and not costive is false. sent3: if something is Julian it is proteinaceous. sent4: the fact that the bang is both not nonlexical and not costive is not right if there is something such that it is not a kind of a gangrene. sent5: there exists something such that it is a gangrene. sent6: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a gangrene. sent7: the handhold is a kind of a neoromanticism that is a kind of a Julian if the drone is not psycholinguistics. sent8: the handhold is a neoromanticism if the drone is not psycholinguistics. sent9: if the fact that the bang is not nonlexical and is not costive does not hold the drone is not psycholinguistics. sent10: the handhold is not proteinaceous if the bang is proteinaceous and it is nonlexical. sent11: the handhold is a neoromanticism.
sent6 & sent4 -> int1: that the bang is not nonlexical and it is not costive does not hold.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the drone is not psycholinguistics.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the handhold is a neoromanticism that is a Julian.; int3 -> int4: the handhold is a Julian.; sent3 -> int5: the handhold is proteinaceous if it is a kind of a Julian.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that it is not a glycogen.
$hypothesis$ = the handhold is not proteinaceous. ; $context$ = sent1: if the feedlot is psycholinguistics that the handhold is a kind of costive thing that is not nonlexical is not true. sent2: if something is not a gangrene then that the bang is both nonlexical and not costive is false. sent3: if something is Julian it is proteinaceous. sent4: the fact that the bang is both not nonlexical and not costive is not right if there is something such that it is not a kind of a gangrene. sent5: there exists something such that it is a gangrene. sent6: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a gangrene. sent7: the handhold is a kind of a neoromanticism that is a kind of a Julian if the drone is not psycholinguistics. sent8: the handhold is a neoromanticism if the drone is not psycholinguistics. sent9: if the fact that the bang is not nonlexical and is not costive does not hold the drone is not psycholinguistics. sent10: the handhold is not proteinaceous if the bang is proteinaceous and it is nonlexical. sent11: the handhold is a neoromanticism. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 & sent4 -> int1: that the bang is not nonlexical and it is not costive does not hold.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the drone is not psycholinguistics.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the handhold is a neoromanticism that is a Julian.; int3 -> int4: the handhold is a Julian.; sent3 -> int5: the handhold is proteinaceous if it is a kind of a Julian.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__