the fact that the carport warms specialism is correct.
sent1: the brioche is a stirrup. sent2: if the snatcher is not quincentennial then the brioche is a kind of a stirrup. sent3: that something is not genic but microsomal is wrong if it is not Uzbekistani. sent4: the brioche is a kind of a stirrup that is not a kind of a lipoma if that the snatcher is non-quincentennial is right. sent5: something is not quincentennial and does not warm specialism if it is not a kind of a sociolinguist. sent6: if the snatcher drinks masculine that it does warm prothrombinase and it is not a tadalafil is wrong. sent7: if the fact that something does not warm prothrombinase but it is genic hold it is not a sociolinguist. sent8: the snatcher does not warm prothrombinase if that it warm prothrombinase and is not a tadalafil does not hold. sent9: that the snatcher is not a quincentennial is not false. sent10: the fact that the carport does warm specialism is correct if the snatcher is non-quincentennial and it does not warm specialism. sent11: there exists something such that it carbonates nefazodone. sent12: the snatcher does drink masculine. sent13: if the fact that the brioche is a stirrup that is not a lipoma is not incorrect then that the carport does not warm specialism hold.
sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the brioche is a kind of a stirrup but it is not a kind of a lipoma.; sent13 & int1 -> hypothesis;
the carport does warm specialism.
sent5 -> int2: if the snatcher is not a sociolinguist then it is not a kind of a quincentennial and it does not warm specialism.; sent7 -> int3: if that the snatcher does not warm prothrombinase but it is genic hold then it is not a sociolinguist.; sent6 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the snatcher warms prothrombinase and is not a tadalafil does not hold.; sent8 & int4 -> int5: the snatcher does not warm prothrombinase.; sent3 -> int6: if the brioche is not Uzbekistani then the fact that it is not genic and it is microsomal does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the carport warms specialism is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the brioche is a stirrup. sent2: if the snatcher is not quincentennial then the brioche is a kind of a stirrup. sent3: that something is not genic but microsomal is wrong if it is not Uzbekistani. sent4: the brioche is a kind of a stirrup that is not a kind of a lipoma if that the snatcher is non-quincentennial is right. sent5: something is not quincentennial and does not warm specialism if it is not a kind of a sociolinguist. sent6: if the snatcher drinks masculine that it does warm prothrombinase and it is not a tadalafil is wrong. sent7: if the fact that something does not warm prothrombinase but it is genic hold it is not a sociolinguist. sent8: the snatcher does not warm prothrombinase if that it warm prothrombinase and is not a tadalafil does not hold. sent9: that the snatcher is not a quincentennial is not false. sent10: the fact that the carport does warm specialism is correct if the snatcher is non-quincentennial and it does not warm specialism. sent11: there exists something such that it carbonates nefazodone. sent12: the snatcher does drink masculine. sent13: if the fact that the brioche is a stirrup that is not a lipoma is not incorrect then that the carport does not warm specialism hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the brioche is a kind of a stirrup but it is not a kind of a lipoma.; sent13 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__