that the hailstone is not limbic is true.
sent1: if the tidbit is not tartaric the infiltration is not cenogenetic. sent2: the pouter is not a hiccup and not a medallion if the tidbit is not cenogenetic. sent3: if the infiltration does disoblige undesirability but it does not disoblige state the pouter is not a hiccup. sent4: if the infiltration is not non-backing that the hailstone does disoblige state is not wrong. sent5: the hailstone is not cenogenetic. sent6: if the fact that the tidbit does not disoblige undesirability and it is not a backing hold the infiltration is not tartaric. sent7: if something is not a medallion that it is tartaric and is not cenogenetic is not right. sent8: that the pouter is limbic is correct. sent9: the tidbit is a Nelson. sent10: the hailstone is a backing. sent11: if the infiltration does not disoblige undesirability then it does disoblige Sigmodon and it is backing. sent12: the tidbit is not cenogenetic and it is non-tartaric. sent13: the pouter is not a hiccup. sent14: the tidbit is a kind of a hiccup. sent15: that the infiltration does not disoblige undesirability if the pouter is not a kind of a hiccup and it is not a medallion is not wrong. sent16: if something does disoblige state then that it is limbic is not incorrect. sent17: if the tidbit is not non-backing but non-cenogenetic the infiltration does not disoblige Sigmodon.
sent12 -> int1: the tidbit is non-cenogenetic.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the pouter is not a hiccup and it is not a medallion.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the fact that the infiltration does not disoblige undesirability is correct.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: the infiltration does disoblige Sigmodon and it does back.; int4 -> int5: the infiltration is a backing.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the hailstone disobliges state.; sent16 -> int7: if the hailstone does disoblige state the fact that it is limbic hold.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis;
the hailstone is not limbic.
sent7 -> int8: the fact that the tidbit is tartaric but it is not cenogenetic is wrong if it is not a medallion.;
$hypothesis$ = that the hailstone is not limbic is true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the tidbit is not tartaric the infiltration is not cenogenetic. sent2: the pouter is not a hiccup and not a medallion if the tidbit is not cenogenetic. sent3: if the infiltration does disoblige undesirability but it does not disoblige state the pouter is not a hiccup. sent4: if the infiltration is not non-backing that the hailstone does disoblige state is not wrong. sent5: the hailstone is not cenogenetic. sent6: if the fact that the tidbit does not disoblige undesirability and it is not a backing hold the infiltration is not tartaric. sent7: if something is not a medallion that it is tartaric and is not cenogenetic is not right. sent8: that the pouter is limbic is correct. sent9: the tidbit is a Nelson. sent10: the hailstone is a backing. sent11: if the infiltration does not disoblige undesirability then it does disoblige Sigmodon and it is backing. sent12: the tidbit is not cenogenetic and it is non-tartaric. sent13: the pouter is not a hiccup. sent14: the tidbit is a kind of a hiccup. sent15: that the infiltration does not disoblige undesirability if the pouter is not a kind of a hiccup and it is not a medallion is not wrong. sent16: if something does disoblige state then that it is limbic is not incorrect. sent17: if the tidbit is not non-backing but non-cenogenetic the infiltration does not disoblige Sigmodon. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: the tidbit is non-cenogenetic.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the pouter is not a hiccup and it is not a medallion.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the fact that the infiltration does not disoblige undesirability is correct.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: the infiltration does disoblige Sigmodon and it does back.; int4 -> int5: the infiltration is a backing.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the hailstone disobliges state.; sent16 -> int7: if the hailstone does disoblige state the fact that it is limbic hold.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__