that the conferrer molds hold.
sent1: the wrester is traceable thing that is a kind of a dustmop if it is not dicotyledonous. sent2: the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus and not a genet is not correct if there exists something such that the fact that it does not symbolize Eden is right. sent3: the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus but it is a genet is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that something does not dominate dobra and is not a conformist is incorrect then it does dominate wrester. sent5: the conferrer is not a molding if the Eden is not a Istiophorus and does not symbolize Eden. sent6: if something is a genet then it is not a Istiophorus and does not symbolize Eden. sent7: the conferrer does dominate eyeball if the fact that it is not a genet and it is not a refill is wrong. sent8: if the conferrer is a genet it humanizes Prakrit. sent9: if something is a genet it does humanize Prakrit. sent10: something does humanize Prakrit if the fact that it is viricidal and does not humanize Prakrit is not correct. sent11: there exists something such that it does not symbolize Eden. sent12: the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus and is a kind of a genet is incorrect if there exists something such that it does not symbolize Eden. sent13: if the fact that something is not a reactor and it is not a third does not hold then it is a kind of a coliphage. sent14: if the wrester is traceable the fact that the Eden is not non-viricidal and does not humanize Prakrit is wrong. sent15: if that something is not a Istiophorus and it is not a genet is not right then that it does humanize Prakrit is not false. sent16: something does symbolize Eden. sent17: something is ethnological if it is a kind of a bandwagon.
sent11 & sent2 -> int1: that the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus and it is not a genet is not true is true.; sent15 -> int2: the conferrer humanizes Prakrit if the fact that it is not a Istiophorus and is not a genet is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the conferrer does humanize Prakrit.;
the conferrer is not a kind of a molding.
sent6 -> int4: if the Eden is a genet it is not a Istiophorus and does not symbolize Eden.; sent10 -> int5: if the fact that the Eden is viricidal and does not humanize Prakrit is incorrect it humanize Prakrit.;
$hypothesis$ = that the conferrer molds hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the wrester is traceable thing that is a kind of a dustmop if it is not dicotyledonous. sent2: the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus and not a genet is not correct if there exists something such that the fact that it does not symbolize Eden is right. sent3: the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus but it is a genet is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that something does not dominate dobra and is not a conformist is incorrect then it does dominate wrester. sent5: the conferrer is not a molding if the Eden is not a Istiophorus and does not symbolize Eden. sent6: if something is a genet then it is not a Istiophorus and does not symbolize Eden. sent7: the conferrer does dominate eyeball if the fact that it is not a genet and it is not a refill is wrong. sent8: if the conferrer is a genet it humanizes Prakrit. sent9: if something is a genet it does humanize Prakrit. sent10: something does humanize Prakrit if the fact that it is viricidal and does not humanize Prakrit is not correct. sent11: there exists something such that it does not symbolize Eden. sent12: the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus and is a kind of a genet is incorrect if there exists something such that it does not symbolize Eden. sent13: if the fact that something is not a reactor and it is not a third does not hold then it is a kind of a coliphage. sent14: if the wrester is traceable the fact that the Eden is not non-viricidal and does not humanize Prakrit is wrong. sent15: if that something is not a Istiophorus and it is not a genet is not right then that it does humanize Prakrit is not false. sent16: something does symbolize Eden. sent17: something is ethnological if it is a kind of a bandwagon. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 & sent2 -> int1: that the fact that the conferrer is not a Istiophorus and it is not a genet is not true is true.; sent15 -> int2: the conferrer humanizes Prakrit if the fact that it is not a Istiophorus and is not a genet is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the conferrer does humanize Prakrit.; __UNKNOWN__