the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism.
sent1: the breeches is a kind of a doula if that the mayonnaise does not cast weevil and is a macrocephaly is wrong. sent2: that the breeches is a doula if the mayonnaise does cast weevil is true. sent3: if something that is non-acidimetric is not a kind of a lovage then it is non-posterior. sent4: if that the absorption is acidimetric hold that the Rambouillet is a kind of non-posterior thing that is not a lovage is not right. sent5: the polygynist is thalamocortical or it populates swelling or both if there exists something such that it populates swelling. sent6: the swelling is non-graphics if either the polygynist is thalamocortical or it populates swelling or both. sent7: something that does not officiate is a Golan and acidimetric. sent8: the fact that that that the mayonnaise does populate clericalism and it is catoptrics is wrong is not wrong if the mayonnaise is not a kind of a posterior is right. sent9: if the breeches is a posterior that the mayonnaise is not a doula and/or is not catoptrics is incorrect. sent10: if the swelling is not a kind of a graphics then the cocoon is not endergonic but it is a sip. sent11: there is something such that it populates swelling. sent12: the fact that the mayonnaise does not cast weevil but it is a macrocephaly is false if it does not populate clericalism. sent13: if the fact that the Rambouillet is not a kind of a posterior and it is not a kind of a lovage is not correct the breeches is a kind of a posterior. sent14: that the mayonnaise casts weevil and is a macrocephaly is not right. sent15: if the fact that something is not a doula and/or it is not catoptrics is wrong then that it does not populate clericalism hold. sent16: if the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism then the fact that it does cast weevil and it is a macrocephaly does not hold. sent17: the breeches is not a doula. sent18: if the cocoon is non-endergonic but it is a sip the morocco does not officiate.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the mayonnaise does not cast weevil but it is a macrocephaly does not hold.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the breeches is a doula.; int2 & sent17 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism.
sent15 -> int4: that the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism is correct if the fact that it is not a doula and/or it is not catoptrics is false.; sent7 -> int5: the morocco is a Golan and is acidimetric if it does not officiate.; sent11 & sent5 -> int6: either the polygynist is thalamocortical or it populates swelling or both.; sent6 & int6 -> int7: the swelling is not graphics.; sent10 & int7 -> int8: the cocoon is a kind of non-endergonic thing that does sip.; sent18 & int8 -> int9: the morocco does not officiate.; int5 & int9 -> int10: the morocco is a Golan and acidimetric.; int10 -> int11: the morocco is acidimetric.; int11 -> int12: the morocco is acidimetric and/or it is a kind of a chit.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that either it is acidimetric or it is a chit or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism. ; $context$ = sent1: the breeches is a kind of a doula if that the mayonnaise does not cast weevil and is a macrocephaly is wrong. sent2: that the breeches is a doula if the mayonnaise does cast weevil is true. sent3: if something that is non-acidimetric is not a kind of a lovage then it is non-posterior. sent4: if that the absorption is acidimetric hold that the Rambouillet is a kind of non-posterior thing that is not a lovage is not right. sent5: the polygynist is thalamocortical or it populates swelling or both if there exists something such that it populates swelling. sent6: the swelling is non-graphics if either the polygynist is thalamocortical or it populates swelling or both. sent7: something that does not officiate is a Golan and acidimetric. sent8: the fact that that that the mayonnaise does populate clericalism and it is catoptrics is wrong is not wrong if the mayonnaise is not a kind of a posterior is right. sent9: if the breeches is a posterior that the mayonnaise is not a doula and/or is not catoptrics is incorrect. sent10: if the swelling is not a kind of a graphics then the cocoon is not endergonic but it is a sip. sent11: there is something such that it populates swelling. sent12: the fact that the mayonnaise does not cast weevil but it is a macrocephaly is false if it does not populate clericalism. sent13: if the fact that the Rambouillet is not a kind of a posterior and it is not a kind of a lovage is not correct the breeches is a kind of a posterior. sent14: that the mayonnaise casts weevil and is a macrocephaly is not right. sent15: if the fact that something is not a doula and/or it is not catoptrics is wrong then that it does not populate clericalism hold. sent16: if the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism then the fact that it does cast weevil and it is a macrocephaly does not hold. sent17: the breeches is not a doula. sent18: if the cocoon is non-endergonic but it is a sip the morocco does not officiate. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mayonnaise does not populate clericalism.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the mayonnaise does not cast weevil but it is a macrocephaly does not hold.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the breeches is a doula.; int2 & sent17 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__