the fact that the woolsorter does not Simonize portrait hold.
sent1: the friedcake does not disjoin. sent2: the maul does not disjoin. sent3: that the maul does not Simonize portrait and is a Rahu does not hold. sent4: if something does disjoin it does Simonize portrait. sent5: the sapsucker is thallophytic and it does heat paternity. sent6: the maul does not heat asterism. sent7: if the fact that the woolsorter is both not semiotic and a Rahu is not true the maul does not Simonize portrait. sent8: if the fact that the apothecium is not catechistic is true then the fact that the maul is a kind of a residual but it is not a colonel does not hold. sent9: the woolsorter does not Simonize portrait if that the maul is semiotic hold. sent10: the apothecium is not catechistic if there is something such that it is thallophytic. sent11: something disjoins and it is a kind of an aircraft if it is not a kind of an ale. sent12: something that does not lunch nurser is either an ale or not an aircraft or both. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is residual and it is not a kind of a colonel is not right then the fact that the friedcake does not lunch nurser hold. sent14: if the friedcake does not disjoin the fact that the maul is semiotic and is a Rahu is wrong. sent15: the woolsorter does not Simonize portrait if the fact that the maul is a kind of non-semiotic a Rahu is false.
the fact that the maul does not Simonize portrait is correct.
sent11 -> int1: the friedcake disjoins and it is a kind of an aircraft if the fact that it is not a kind of an ale hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the woolsorter does not Simonize portrait hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the friedcake does not disjoin. sent2: the maul does not disjoin. sent3: that the maul does not Simonize portrait and is a Rahu does not hold. sent4: if something does disjoin it does Simonize portrait. sent5: the sapsucker is thallophytic and it does heat paternity. sent6: the maul does not heat asterism. sent7: if the fact that the woolsorter is both not semiotic and a Rahu is not true the maul does not Simonize portrait. sent8: if the fact that the apothecium is not catechistic is true then the fact that the maul is a kind of a residual but it is not a colonel does not hold. sent9: the woolsorter does not Simonize portrait if that the maul is semiotic hold. sent10: the apothecium is not catechistic if there is something such that it is thallophytic. sent11: something disjoins and it is a kind of an aircraft if it is not a kind of an ale. sent12: something that does not lunch nurser is either an ale or not an aircraft or both. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is residual and it is not a kind of a colonel is not right then the fact that the friedcake does not lunch nurser hold. sent14: if the friedcake does not disjoin the fact that the maul is semiotic and is a Rahu is wrong. sent15: the woolsorter does not Simonize portrait if the fact that the maul is a kind of non-semiotic a Rahu is false. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__