the attire is unbridgeable.
sent1: if that the fluorocarbon is atrophic is true then the shrimp is not a kind of a serviceability. sent2: the fact that the fact that the shrimp is not atrophic but it is Hellenic does not hold hold if the fact that the noncandidate is Hellenic is not right. sent3: if the noncandidate either is not unbridgeable or is a serviceability or both then the fact that the attire is not unbridgeable is not wrong. sent4: if something that is not a serviceability is not a bunyavirus it is not Hellenic. sent5: the fluorocarbon is not a kind of a feint and it is not Hellenic if the noncandidate is unbridgeable. sent6: the attire is coeliac. sent7: if the fluorocarbon is coeliac then the fact that that the noncandidate is not a bunyavirus and survives does not hold is not false. sent8: there is something such that it is a kind of non-coeliac thing that does survive. sent9: if the fact that something is not a bunyavirus but it survives is wrong then it is not atrophic. sent10: the politician is illicit and/or it is not a betrothal. sent11: if something does not queue then it is coeliac. sent12: if the fluorocarbon is a kind of a bunyavirus it is a kind of a serviceability. sent13: if something that does not feint is not a kind of a Barbarossa it is not a serviceability. sent14: if the fact that the shrimp is both non-atrophic and Hellenic is not right then the attire is unbridgeable. sent15: the fluorocarbon is coeliac if the shrimp is coeliac. sent16: if the noncandidate is not non-Hellenic then the fluorocarbon is not a feint and it is not a kind of a Barbarossa. sent17: that the politician is not transatlantic is not incorrect if it is illicit or it is not a betrothal or both. sent18: if something that is not coeliac does survive the fluorocarbon is a kind of a bunyavirus. sent19: if the fact that something is not transatlantic is correct the fact that it is a NRTI and is morphemic is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the noncandidate is Hellenic.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the fluorocarbon is not a feint and it is not a Barbarossa.; sent13 -> int2: the fluorocarbon is not a kind of a serviceability if it is not a feint and is not a Barbarossa.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fluorocarbon is not a serviceability.; sent8 & sent18 -> int4: the fluorocarbon is a bunyavirus.; sent12 & int4 -> int5: the fluorocarbon is a serviceability.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the noncandidate is not Hellenic.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: that the shrimp is not atrophic and not non-Hellenic is not right.; int8 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
the attire is not unbridgeable.
sent9 -> int9: the noncandidate is not atrophic if that it is not a kind of a bunyavirus and does survive is not true.; sent11 -> int10: the shrimp is coeliac if it is not a queue.; sent19 -> int11: the fact that the politician is both a NRTI and morphemic is not correct if it is not transatlantic.; sent17 & sent10 -> int12: the politician is not transatlantic.; int11 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the politician is a NRTI and it is morphemic is false.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that the fact that it is both a NRTI and morphemic is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the attire is unbridgeable. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the fluorocarbon is atrophic is true then the shrimp is not a kind of a serviceability. sent2: the fact that the fact that the shrimp is not atrophic but it is Hellenic does not hold hold if the fact that the noncandidate is Hellenic is not right. sent3: if the noncandidate either is not unbridgeable or is a serviceability or both then the fact that the attire is not unbridgeable is not wrong. sent4: if something that is not a serviceability is not a bunyavirus it is not Hellenic. sent5: the fluorocarbon is not a kind of a feint and it is not Hellenic if the noncandidate is unbridgeable. sent6: the attire is coeliac. sent7: if the fluorocarbon is coeliac then the fact that that the noncandidate is not a bunyavirus and survives does not hold is not false. sent8: there is something such that it is a kind of non-coeliac thing that does survive. sent9: if the fact that something is not a bunyavirus but it survives is wrong then it is not atrophic. sent10: the politician is illicit and/or it is not a betrothal. sent11: if something does not queue then it is coeliac. sent12: if the fluorocarbon is a kind of a bunyavirus it is a kind of a serviceability. sent13: if something that does not feint is not a kind of a Barbarossa it is not a serviceability. sent14: if the fact that the shrimp is both non-atrophic and Hellenic is not right then the attire is unbridgeable. sent15: the fluorocarbon is coeliac if the shrimp is coeliac. sent16: if the noncandidate is not non-Hellenic then the fluorocarbon is not a feint and it is not a kind of a Barbarossa. sent17: that the politician is not transatlantic is not incorrect if it is illicit or it is not a betrothal or both. sent18: if something that is not coeliac does survive the fluorocarbon is a kind of a bunyavirus. sent19: if the fact that something is not transatlantic is correct the fact that it is a NRTI and is morphemic is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the noncandidate is Hellenic.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the fluorocarbon is not a feint and it is not a Barbarossa.; sent13 -> int2: the fluorocarbon is not a kind of a serviceability if it is not a feint and is not a Barbarossa.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fluorocarbon is not a serviceability.; sent8 & sent18 -> int4: the fluorocarbon is a bunyavirus.; sent12 & int4 -> int5: the fluorocarbon is a serviceability.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the noncandidate is not Hellenic.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: that the shrimp is not atrophic and not non-Hellenic is not right.; int8 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__