the nib is not a defervescence.
sent1: the pornographer is a stand if that it is not unlivable is right. sent2: the nib does not moil if that it is good and is a Homogyne does not hold. sent3: something that is not a kind of a complexion is not a defervescence. sent4: if the fact that something complexions and is good is wrong then it is not a defervescence. sent5: if something does measure impersonator then that it is arbitrative hold. sent6: the fact that there is nothing such that it is a complexion and it is a kind of a good is correct. sent7: something is a defervescence if that the fact that it is not a kind of a waterloo is false is correct. sent8: there exists nothing such that it is offshore and it is ascitic. sent9: the nib is not a defervescence if it does not complexion. sent10: if that something does not measure Pomo but it is a kind of a consistency is not correct then it is a waterloo. sent11: the Pomo is inaccurate. sent12: the fact that something does not measure Pomo and is a consistency is wrong if it is arbitrative. sent13: if the Pomo is inaccurate then that the pornographer is not unlivable is not wrong.
sent4 -> int1: the nib is not a defervescence if the fact that it is a complexion and it is a kind of a good is not correct.; sent6 -> int2: the fact that the nib is a complexion that is a good does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;
that the nib is a defervescence is not wrong.
sent7 -> int3: the nib is a defervescence if it is a waterloo.; sent10 -> int4: the nib is a waterloo if the fact that it does not measure Pomo and it is a consistency is false.; sent12 -> int5: if the fact that the nib is arbitrative hold then the fact that it does not measure Pomo and is a consistency is not true.; sent5 -> int6: if the nib measures impersonator then it is arbitrative.; sent13 & sent11 -> int7: the fact that the pornographer is not unlivable is right.; sent1 & int7 -> int8: the pornographer stands.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it does stand.;
$hypothesis$ = the nib is not a defervescence. ; $context$ = sent1: the pornographer is a stand if that it is not unlivable is right. sent2: the nib does not moil if that it is good and is a Homogyne does not hold. sent3: something that is not a kind of a complexion is not a defervescence. sent4: if the fact that something complexions and is good is wrong then it is not a defervescence. sent5: if something does measure impersonator then that it is arbitrative hold. sent6: the fact that there is nothing such that it is a complexion and it is a kind of a good is correct. sent7: something is a defervescence if that the fact that it is not a kind of a waterloo is false is correct. sent8: there exists nothing such that it is offshore and it is ascitic. sent9: the nib is not a defervescence if it does not complexion. sent10: if that something does not measure Pomo but it is a kind of a consistency is not correct then it is a waterloo. sent11: the Pomo is inaccurate. sent12: the fact that something does not measure Pomo and is a consistency is wrong if it is arbitrative. sent13: if the Pomo is inaccurate then that the pornographer is not unlivable is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: the nib is not a defervescence if the fact that it is a complexion and it is a kind of a good is not correct.; sent6 -> int2: the fact that the nib is a complexion that is a good does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__