the inquirer does not move Loeb but it educates.
sent1: that the chevron does not dally is not incorrect if a punic thing is unlike. sent2: there is something such that it is not a canopy and it is not a kind of a waverer. sent3: the silverfish is not a African and/or it is not punic if it is not unlike. sent4: if something does dally it does move Loeb. sent5: there exists something such that it does not dally and does not move Loeb. sent6: if the chevron does not dally then the inquirer does not move Loeb. sent7: the fact that the silverfish does dally and it is inshore is false. sent8: the silverfish is not a kind of a destruction. sent9: the inquirer does not move Loeb but it does educate if the chevron does not dally. sent10: there is something such that it does not move Loeb. sent11: the silverfish does move Loeb if the inquirer is statesmanlike. sent12: something does educate but it is not a destruction. sent13: if the reactance does move Loeb then it is punic. sent14: that the odist is not a African and it does not move Micmac does not hold. sent15: the odist is not a African. sent16: something is not unlike but it does move Loeb. sent17: the odist is a African if the fact that the silverfish is statesmanlike hold. sent18: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a destruction and does not move Micmac the silverfish is statesmanlike. sent19: the inquirer is not unlike if the fact that the reactance does not educate is true. sent20: if there are unstatesmanlike and like things the reactance is a kind of a destruction. sent21: if the fact that the odist is not unlike and it is not a destruction is not correct the fact that it is a African is not false. sent22: the fact that the reactance is not unlike is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the reactance is not a kind of a destruction and it does not move Micmac.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that it is not a destruction and does not move Micmac.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the silverfish is statesmanlike.; int2 & sent17 -> int3: the odist is a kind of a African.; int3 & sent15 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the reactance is not a destruction and it does not move Micmac does not hold.;
the fact that the inquirer does not move Loeb and does educate is not true.
$hypothesis$ = the inquirer does not move Loeb but it educates. ; $context$ = sent1: that the chevron does not dally is not incorrect if a punic thing is unlike. sent2: there is something such that it is not a canopy and it is not a kind of a waverer. sent3: the silverfish is not a African and/or it is not punic if it is not unlike. sent4: if something does dally it does move Loeb. sent5: there exists something such that it does not dally and does not move Loeb. sent6: if the chevron does not dally then the inquirer does not move Loeb. sent7: the fact that the silverfish does dally and it is inshore is false. sent8: the silverfish is not a kind of a destruction. sent9: the inquirer does not move Loeb but it does educate if the chevron does not dally. sent10: there is something such that it does not move Loeb. sent11: the silverfish does move Loeb if the inquirer is statesmanlike. sent12: something does educate but it is not a destruction. sent13: if the reactance does move Loeb then it is punic. sent14: that the odist is not a African and it does not move Micmac does not hold. sent15: the odist is not a African. sent16: something is not unlike but it does move Loeb. sent17: the odist is a African if the fact that the silverfish is statesmanlike hold. sent18: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a destruction and does not move Micmac the silverfish is statesmanlike. sent19: the inquirer is not unlike if the fact that the reactance does not educate is true. sent20: if there are unstatesmanlike and like things the reactance is a kind of a destruction. sent21: if the fact that the odist is not unlike and it is not a destruction is not correct the fact that it is a African is not false. sent22: the fact that the reactance is not unlike is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the reactance is not a kind of a destruction and it does not move Micmac.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that it is not a destruction and does not move Micmac.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the silverfish is statesmanlike.; int2 & sent17 -> int3: the odist is a kind of a African.; int3 & sent15 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the reactance is not a destruction and it does not move Micmac does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__