that the pathogen is not a mobile hold.
sent1: if the pathogen is not unpeaceful then the edaphosaurus either is not unpeaceful or is not serous or both. sent2: if that the fact that something is not a kind of a welding and it is not unpermissive is not wrong does not hold it is a indomethacin. sent3: if the roble is a indomethacin then that the loins is a kind of non-serous thing that is unpeaceful does not hold. sent4: that the pathogen is not unpeaceful is correct if that it is a SACLANT and is not inadmissible is not correct. sent5: the rill is systolic if it does impersonate scyphus and does not impersonate debate. sent6: the fact that the edaphosaurus is serous is correct if there exists something such that that it is not serous and it is unpeaceful is incorrect. sent7: the rill impersonates scyphus and does not impersonate debate. sent8: the pathogen is not a indomethacin. sent9: the fact that the pathogen is serous and a SACLANT is false. sent10: if the edaphosaurus is not unpeaceful and/or it is not serous then the fact that it is not a indomethacin hold. sent11: if the pathogen is a kind of a SACLANT that is not inadmissible then that it is not immobile is not incorrect. sent12: if there exists something such that that it is not a dribble and is a kind of a Gabonese is not true the roble is not a Gabonese. sent13: that the fact that the rill is not a dribble but the Gabonese is wrong if the rill is systolic is true. sent14: the edaphosaurus is serous and is not a SACLANT. sent15: the fact that something is both not a welding and not unpermissive does not hold if the fact that it is not Gabonese is not false. sent16: that the edaphosaurus is a indomethacin is not incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the pathogen is a SACLANT but it is not inadmissible does not hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the pathogen is not unpeaceful.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the edaphosaurus is peaceful or it is not serous or both hold.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the edaphosaurus is not a indomethacin.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the pathogen is a kind of a SACLANT that is not inadmissible.; int5 & sent11 -> hypothesis;
the pathogen is immobile.
sent2 -> int6: the roble is a indomethacin if that it is not a welding and not unpermissive is wrong.; sent15 -> int7: if the roble is not Gabonese then that it is not a welding and it is not unpermissive is false.; sent5 & sent7 -> int8: the rill is systolic.; sent13 & int8 -> int9: that the rill is not a dribble but it is a Gabonese is false.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a dribble and is a Gabonese is not right.; int10 & sent12 -> int11: that the roble is not a Gabonese is not incorrect.; int7 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the roble is not a welding and it is not unpermissive is incorrect.; int6 & int12 -> int13: the roble is a indomethacin.; sent3 & int13 -> int14: that the loins is not serous and is unpeaceful is false.; int14 -> int15: there is something such that the fact that it is not serous and it is unpeaceful is not correct.; int15 & sent6 -> int16: that the edaphosaurus is not serous is false.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that the fact that it is serous is right.;
$hypothesis$ = that the pathogen is not a mobile hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pathogen is not unpeaceful then the edaphosaurus either is not unpeaceful or is not serous or both. sent2: if that the fact that something is not a kind of a welding and it is not unpermissive is not wrong does not hold it is a indomethacin. sent3: if the roble is a indomethacin then that the loins is a kind of non-serous thing that is unpeaceful does not hold. sent4: that the pathogen is not unpeaceful is correct if that it is a SACLANT and is not inadmissible is not correct. sent5: the rill is systolic if it does impersonate scyphus and does not impersonate debate. sent6: the fact that the edaphosaurus is serous is correct if there exists something such that that it is not serous and it is unpeaceful is incorrect. sent7: the rill impersonates scyphus and does not impersonate debate. sent8: the pathogen is not a indomethacin. sent9: the fact that the pathogen is serous and a SACLANT is false. sent10: if the edaphosaurus is not unpeaceful and/or it is not serous then the fact that it is not a indomethacin hold. sent11: if the pathogen is a kind of a SACLANT that is not inadmissible then that it is not immobile is not incorrect. sent12: if there exists something such that that it is not a dribble and is a kind of a Gabonese is not true the roble is not a Gabonese. sent13: that the fact that the rill is not a dribble but the Gabonese is wrong if the rill is systolic is true. sent14: the edaphosaurus is serous and is not a SACLANT. sent15: the fact that something is both not a welding and not unpermissive does not hold if the fact that it is not Gabonese is not false. sent16: that the edaphosaurus is a indomethacin is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the pathogen is a SACLANT but it is not inadmissible does not hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the pathogen is not unpeaceful.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the edaphosaurus is peaceful or it is not serous or both hold.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the edaphosaurus is not a indomethacin.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the pathogen is a kind of a SACLANT that is not inadmissible.; int5 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__