the sac is not enforceable and is not a putrescence.
sent1: if something is not enforceable then that it is not a putrescence and is a phone-in is not true. sent2: if there exists something such that it does hog Duncan and does not piece Barth then that the overhead is enforceable hold. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is not aquiferous and it does beggar sac hold is false then the shred does not beggar sac. sent4: the belfry is not fearful. sent5: the fact that the antibody is not aquiferous but it does beggar sac is wrong. sent6: if there exists something such that it does hog Duncan and pieces Barth then the overhead is enforceable. sent7: there is something such that it does not piece Barth. sent8: that the sac is enforceable but it is not a putrescence is wrong if the overhead is enforceable. sent9: that the overhead is both enforceable and not a putrescence is false. sent10: if the overhead is enforceable then that the sac is enforceable thing that is a putrescence is not true. sent11: the bull's-eye is a putrescence if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a putrescence and it is a phone-in is not right. sent12: the fact that the sac is enforceable and is not a putrescence does not hold. sent13: the sac is not a putrescence if the overhead is not a putrescence but it is a phone-in. sent14: that there is something such that it is enforceable is not wrong. sent15: the fact that something is a bobtail and it does beggar Shan is not correct if it is not fearful. sent16: something does hog Duncan but it does not piece Barth. sent17: that that the sac is unenforceable and a putrescence is not wrong does not hold. sent18: the shrine is pilosebaceous or photometric or both if the belfry is non-Mercurial. sent19: the fact that the sac is not enforceable and it is not a kind of a putrescence is false if the overhead is enforceable. sent20: the belfry is not Mercurial if the fact that it is a bobtail and does beggar Shan is incorrect.
sent16 & sent2 -> int1: the overhead is enforceable.; sent19 & int1 -> hypothesis;
that the bull's-eye is a putrescence is not incorrect.
sent1 -> int2: that the overhead is not a putrescence but a phone-in does not hold if it is not enforceable.;
$hypothesis$ = the sac is not enforceable and is not a putrescence. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not enforceable then that it is not a putrescence and is a phone-in is not true. sent2: if there exists something such that it does hog Duncan and does not piece Barth then that the overhead is enforceable hold. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is not aquiferous and it does beggar sac hold is false then the shred does not beggar sac. sent4: the belfry is not fearful. sent5: the fact that the antibody is not aquiferous but it does beggar sac is wrong. sent6: if there exists something such that it does hog Duncan and pieces Barth then the overhead is enforceable. sent7: there is something such that it does not piece Barth. sent8: that the sac is enforceable but it is not a putrescence is wrong if the overhead is enforceable. sent9: that the overhead is both enforceable and not a putrescence is false. sent10: if the overhead is enforceable then that the sac is enforceable thing that is a putrescence is not true. sent11: the bull's-eye is a putrescence if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a putrescence and it is a phone-in is not right. sent12: the fact that the sac is enforceable and is not a putrescence does not hold. sent13: the sac is not a putrescence if the overhead is not a putrescence but it is a phone-in. sent14: that there is something such that it is enforceable is not wrong. sent15: the fact that something is a bobtail and it does beggar Shan is not correct if it is not fearful. sent16: something does hog Duncan but it does not piece Barth. sent17: that that the sac is unenforceable and a putrescence is not wrong does not hold. sent18: the shrine is pilosebaceous or photometric or both if the belfry is non-Mercurial. sent19: the fact that the sac is not enforceable and it is not a kind of a putrescence is false if the overhead is enforceable. sent20: the belfry is not Mercurial if the fact that it is a bobtail and does beggar Shan is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent16 & sent2 -> int1: the overhead is enforceable.; sent19 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__