the haloperidol does not numb.
sent1: the leucine is inward thing that is a Narthecium if it does not hypothecate conscientiousness. sent2: the leucine is cachectic. sent3: the haloperidol does numb if the bearberry does not numb but it does doctor eosinophil. sent4: the fact that the pyrogen does doctor eosinophil hold if the fact that the T is not a mudcat and it is not amaurotic does not hold. sent5: the fact that the haloperidol does not numb but it is an acropolis is wrong if something is heterocercal. sent6: that the T is a kind of a mudcat and is not amaurotic is false if the bearberry is not heterocercal. sent7: if there is something such that it is inward the haloperidol does not numb. sent8: the fact that the T is not a mudcat and not amaurotic does not hold if the bearberry is not heterocercal. sent9: the fact that the leucine is both not inward and an acropolis is false if something doctors eosinophil. sent10: the fact that the pyrogen foreshows narration and is a omnivore is wrong if the locknut is not an explorer. sent11: something is a mantle but it is not heterocercal if it is cachectic. sent12: the bearberry does not doctor eosinophil if the fact that it is not inward and it is not an acropolis is not correct. sent13: that the leucine is not a kind of a mudcat and is inward is not right. sent14: the fact that the T is not a mudcat but it is amaurotic is incorrect. sent15: if the fact that there is something such that that it doctors eosinophil is not incorrect is right then the fact that the leucine is a kind of inward thing that is a kind of an acropolis is not true. sent16: the link is both microeconomics and a priapism. sent17: the locknut is not an explorer if something is microeconomics a priapism. sent18: there exists something such that the fact that it is not outward and it is an acropolis is incorrect. sent19: that the leucine is inward thing that is an acropolis is incorrect. sent20: something is not a omnivore if that it does foreshow narration and it is a omnivore is not true. sent21: the bearberry is non-heterocercal. sent22: the fact that the T is both a mudcat and not amaurotic does not hold. sent23: if there exists something such that it is not heterocercal and is inward then the bearberry does not numb. sent24: the fact that the T is not a kind of a redcap and is an acropolis does not hold if the pyrogen is not a omnivore.
sent8 & sent21 -> int1: that the T is not a mudcat and it is not amaurotic is incorrect.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the pyrogen does doctor eosinophil.; int2 -> int3: something doctors eosinophil.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: that the leucine is a kind of outward an acropolis is not true.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that that it is not inward and it is an acropolis is not correct.;
there is something such that it is a ripcord.
$hypothesis$ = the haloperidol does not numb. ; $context$ = sent1: the leucine is inward thing that is a Narthecium if it does not hypothecate conscientiousness. sent2: the leucine is cachectic. sent3: the haloperidol does numb if the bearberry does not numb but it does doctor eosinophil. sent4: the fact that the pyrogen does doctor eosinophil hold if the fact that the T is not a mudcat and it is not amaurotic does not hold. sent5: the fact that the haloperidol does not numb but it is an acropolis is wrong if something is heterocercal. sent6: that the T is a kind of a mudcat and is not amaurotic is false if the bearberry is not heterocercal. sent7: if there is something such that it is inward the haloperidol does not numb. sent8: the fact that the T is not a mudcat and not amaurotic does not hold if the bearberry is not heterocercal. sent9: the fact that the leucine is both not inward and an acropolis is false if something doctors eosinophil. sent10: the fact that the pyrogen foreshows narration and is a omnivore is wrong if the locknut is not an explorer. sent11: something is a mantle but it is not heterocercal if it is cachectic. sent12: the bearberry does not doctor eosinophil if the fact that it is not inward and it is not an acropolis is not correct. sent13: that the leucine is not a kind of a mudcat and is inward is not right. sent14: the fact that the T is not a mudcat but it is amaurotic is incorrect. sent15: if the fact that there is something such that that it doctors eosinophil is not incorrect is right then the fact that the leucine is a kind of inward thing that is a kind of an acropolis is not true. sent16: the link is both microeconomics and a priapism. sent17: the locknut is not an explorer if something is microeconomics a priapism. sent18: there exists something such that the fact that it is not outward and it is an acropolis is incorrect. sent19: that the leucine is inward thing that is an acropolis is incorrect. sent20: something is not a omnivore if that it does foreshow narration and it is a omnivore is not true. sent21: the bearberry is non-heterocercal. sent22: the fact that the T is both a mudcat and not amaurotic does not hold. sent23: if there exists something such that it is not heterocercal and is inward then the bearberry does not numb. sent24: the fact that the T is not a kind of a redcap and is an acropolis does not hold if the pyrogen is not a omnivore. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 & sent21 -> int1: that the T is not a mudcat and it is not amaurotic is incorrect.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the pyrogen does doctor eosinophil.; int2 -> int3: something doctors eosinophil.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: that the leucine is a kind of outward an acropolis is not true.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that that it is not inward and it is an acropolis is not correct.; __UNKNOWN__