the enzymologist does not lean dug but it is parietal.
sent1: if the polymath is a kind of a Tayalic it is a protectiveness. sent2: if the fact that something is not monocarpic and it does not lean lifeboat is wrong then the fact that it is a lock hold. sent3: that the dug is a kind of a monoblast is not incorrect. sent4: if something is not colloidal that it does not lean dug and is parietal is wrong. sent5: the enzymologist does lean dug if it is a protectiveness. sent6: the fact that the polymath is a kind of a Tayalic is not false if it is a monoblast. sent7: the enzymologist is a kind of a monoblast if the fact that it is not a kind of a Portuguese and is not a Tayalic is not correct. sent8: the polymath is a kind of a naphtha if the broodmare is a Hubel. sent9: the broodmare is colloidal and/or it is a kind of a Hubel. sent10: if the fact that something is not a monoblast and does not light is not right it is a Portuguese. sent11: if the cot is a Portuguese then it is artful. sent12: the polymath is a naphtha if the broodmare is colloidal. sent13: the enzymologist is a Hubel if the broodmare does lean dug. sent14: if the enzymologist is a Portuguese then it does not lean dug and is not non-parietal. sent15: if the polymath is a protectiveness then it is a Hubel. sent16: if something is a naphtha then it is a kind of a Tayalic. sent17: something is a Tayalic if that it is non-colloidal thing that does not lean dug is not right. sent18: if the enzymologist is Portuguese the broodmare lights. sent19: that the broodmare is not a naphtha is wrong. sent20: that the fact that the enzymologist is not a monoblast and does not light does not hold is right if the polymath is a kind of a protectiveness.
sent9 & sent12 & sent8 -> int1: the polymath is a naphtha.; sent16 -> int2: the polymath is a Tayalic if it is a naphtha.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the polymath is a Tayalic.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the polymath is a protectiveness.; int4 & sent20 -> int5: that the fact that the enzymologist is not a monoblast and it is not lighting is not false is false.; sent10 -> int6: the enzymologist is a kind of a Portuguese if the fact that it is not a monoblast and is not a lighting does not hold.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the enzymologist is a Portuguese.; int7 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
that the enzymologist does not lean dug and is parietal is not true.
sent4 -> int8: that the enzymologist does not lean dug but it is parietal is incorrect if it is not colloidal.;
$hypothesis$ = the enzymologist does not lean dug but it is parietal. ; $context$ = sent1: if the polymath is a kind of a Tayalic it is a protectiveness. sent2: if the fact that something is not monocarpic and it does not lean lifeboat is wrong then the fact that it is a lock hold. sent3: that the dug is a kind of a monoblast is not incorrect. sent4: if something is not colloidal that it does not lean dug and is parietal is wrong. sent5: the enzymologist does lean dug if it is a protectiveness. sent6: the fact that the polymath is a kind of a Tayalic is not false if it is a monoblast. sent7: the enzymologist is a kind of a monoblast if the fact that it is not a kind of a Portuguese and is not a Tayalic is not correct. sent8: the polymath is a kind of a naphtha if the broodmare is a Hubel. sent9: the broodmare is colloidal and/or it is a kind of a Hubel. sent10: if the fact that something is not a monoblast and does not light is not right it is a Portuguese. sent11: if the cot is a Portuguese then it is artful. sent12: the polymath is a naphtha if the broodmare is colloidal. sent13: the enzymologist is a Hubel if the broodmare does lean dug. sent14: if the enzymologist is a Portuguese then it does not lean dug and is not non-parietal. sent15: if the polymath is a protectiveness then it is a Hubel. sent16: if something is a naphtha then it is a kind of a Tayalic. sent17: something is a Tayalic if that it is non-colloidal thing that does not lean dug is not right. sent18: if the enzymologist is Portuguese the broodmare lights. sent19: that the broodmare is not a naphtha is wrong. sent20: that the fact that the enzymologist is not a monoblast and does not light does not hold is right if the polymath is a kind of a protectiveness. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent12 & sent8 -> int1: the polymath is a naphtha.; sent16 -> int2: the polymath is a Tayalic if it is a naphtha.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the polymath is a Tayalic.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the polymath is a protectiveness.; int4 & sent20 -> int5: that the fact that the enzymologist is not a monoblast and it is not lighting is not false is false.; sent10 -> int6: the enzymologist is a kind of a Portuguese if the fact that it is not a monoblast and is not a lighting does not hold.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the enzymologist is a Portuguese.; int7 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__