there is something such that if it does not stable Suva then that it is a kind of a injudiciousness and is a katharobe does not hold.
sent1: that the blaze is a injudiciousness and is a kind of a katharobe is not correct if it does stable Suva. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a Zeppelin then that it does unblock and stables blaze is not right. sent3: that something is a kind of a injudiciousness and it is a kind of a katharobe is wrong if it does not stable Suva. sent4: something is a injudiciousness and is a katharobe if it does not stable Suva. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not stable Suva it is both a injudiciousness and a katharobe. sent6: there is something such that if it is non-spatiotemporal then it does risk kalemia and is a gentile. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a quirt then the fact that it is both a target and a sooth is not correct. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not collapsible then the fact that it forms and it does risk polysaccharide does not hold. sent9: the fact that something is a root and it does stable ben is not true if it is not inexplicable. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it stables Suva hold that it is a injudiciousness and it is a katharobe does not hold. sent11: the blaze is a injudiciousness and is a katharobe if it does not stable Suva. sent12: that something is not non-cursorial but a target is not correct if it is not a love-song. sent13: there is something such that if it does not target that it strips Gordius and it commands Kami is not true. sent14: the fact that something is a injudiciousness and it is a kind of a katharobe does not hold if it does stable Suva. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a root is correct that it is adscript and it does stable geared does not hold. sent16: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Otus then the fact that it is undescriptive and it does risk facula does not hold.
sent3 -> int1: that the blaze is a injudiciousness and it is a katharobe is not right if it does not stable Suva.; int1 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is not a love-song that it is cursorial and a target is not true.
sent12 -> int2: if the ben is not a love-song then that it is cursorial and it is a target does not hold.; int2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not stable Suva then that it is a kind of a injudiciousness and is a katharobe does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the blaze is a injudiciousness and is a kind of a katharobe is not correct if it does stable Suva. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a Zeppelin then that it does unblock and stables blaze is not right. sent3: that something is a kind of a injudiciousness and it is a kind of a katharobe is wrong if it does not stable Suva. sent4: something is a injudiciousness and is a katharobe if it does not stable Suva. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not stable Suva it is both a injudiciousness and a katharobe. sent6: there is something such that if it is non-spatiotemporal then it does risk kalemia and is a gentile. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a quirt then the fact that it is both a target and a sooth is not correct. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not collapsible then the fact that it forms and it does risk polysaccharide does not hold. sent9: the fact that something is a root and it does stable ben is not true if it is not inexplicable. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it stables Suva hold that it is a injudiciousness and it is a katharobe does not hold. sent11: the blaze is a injudiciousness and is a katharobe if it does not stable Suva. sent12: that something is not non-cursorial but a target is not correct if it is not a love-song. sent13: there is something such that if it does not target that it strips Gordius and it commands Kami is not true. sent14: the fact that something is a injudiciousness and it is a kind of a katharobe does not hold if it does stable Suva. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a root is correct that it is adscript and it does stable geared does not hold. sent16: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Otus then the fact that it is undescriptive and it does risk facula does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> int1: that the blaze is a injudiciousness and it is a katharobe is not right if it does not stable Suva.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__