the heifer is thermometric.
sent1: if the epicanthus is not forceless it does not fight Eliot and/or is a drawl. sent2: if something drawls then either it does not fight Eliot or it does not crow or both. sent3: the epicanthus is not a slash. sent4: the potter is a crew if the epicanthus is a Swazi. sent5: the tailor-made is analytic if the paragrapher is a kind of a kisser. sent6: if the tailor-made is a crew then that the potter is not forceless and it is not thermometric is right. sent7: the tailor-made fights Eliot if it is not hyaloplasmic and/or is analytic. sent8: the potter is not a crew if the fact that the tailor-made is not hyaloplasmic and it is not a crew does not hold. sent9: if something is forceless it is not non-Swazi. sent10: the epicanthus is a suslik if the heifer is a Swazi. sent11: the heifer is a suslik if the fact that the epicanthus is analytic hold. sent12: the tailor-made does flounder. sent13: that the potter is a Swazi and not forceless is incorrect if that the tailor-made does crow is not wrong. sent14: if the sartorius is a Aberdare then it does drawl. sent15: the tailor-made does fight Eliot if it crows. sent16: if the epicanthus does crow then the tailor-made fights Eliot. sent17: if something is a kind of a Swazi it is a kind of a crew. sent18: that the tailor-made is not hyaloplasmic and it does not crow is false. sent19: the tailor-made is not a drawl if it is analytic a suslik. sent20: the fact that the potter fights Pandanaceae is right. sent21: the tailor-made is a drawl. sent22: the potter is a suslik. sent23: if that the epicanthus is not a suslik and it is not a kind of a drawl is incorrect then the heifer is not a kind of a drawl. sent24: if the epicanthus does not fight Eliot or does drawl or both then it is analytic. sent25: the tailor-made is not analytic or is hyaloplasmic or both. sent26: the heifer is not thermometric if the potter is not forceless and it is not thermometric.
sent9 -> int1: if the epicanthus is forceless then it is a Swazi.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the epicanthus is forceless.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the epicanthus is not non-Swazi.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the potter crows.; sent8 & sent18 -> int4: the potter is not a crew.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the epicanthus is not forceless.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the epicanthus either does not fight Eliot or is a drawl or both.; int7 & sent24 -> int8: the epicanthus is analytic.; int8 & sent11 -> int9: the heifer is a suslik.;
the fact that the heifer is not thermometric hold.
sent17 -> int10: the tailor-made is a crew if it is a kind of a Swazi.;
$hypothesis$ = the heifer is thermometric. ; $context$ = sent1: if the epicanthus is not forceless it does not fight Eliot and/or is a drawl. sent2: if something drawls then either it does not fight Eliot or it does not crow or both. sent3: the epicanthus is not a slash. sent4: the potter is a crew if the epicanthus is a Swazi. sent5: the tailor-made is analytic if the paragrapher is a kind of a kisser. sent6: if the tailor-made is a crew then that the potter is not forceless and it is not thermometric is right. sent7: the tailor-made fights Eliot if it is not hyaloplasmic and/or is analytic. sent8: the potter is not a crew if the fact that the tailor-made is not hyaloplasmic and it is not a crew does not hold. sent9: if something is forceless it is not non-Swazi. sent10: the epicanthus is a suslik if the heifer is a Swazi. sent11: the heifer is a suslik if the fact that the epicanthus is analytic hold. sent12: the tailor-made does flounder. sent13: that the potter is a Swazi and not forceless is incorrect if that the tailor-made does crow is not wrong. sent14: if the sartorius is a Aberdare then it does drawl. sent15: the tailor-made does fight Eliot if it crows. sent16: if the epicanthus does crow then the tailor-made fights Eliot. sent17: if something is a kind of a Swazi it is a kind of a crew. sent18: that the tailor-made is not hyaloplasmic and it does not crow is false. sent19: the tailor-made is not a drawl if it is analytic a suslik. sent20: the fact that the potter fights Pandanaceae is right. sent21: the tailor-made is a drawl. sent22: the potter is a suslik. sent23: if that the epicanthus is not a suslik and it is not a kind of a drawl is incorrect then the heifer is not a kind of a drawl. sent24: if the epicanthus does not fight Eliot or does drawl or both then it is analytic. sent25: the tailor-made is not analytic or is hyaloplasmic or both. sent26: the heifer is not thermometric if the potter is not forceless and it is not thermometric. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> int1: if the epicanthus is forceless then it is a Swazi.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the epicanthus is forceless.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the epicanthus is not non-Swazi.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the potter crows.; sent8 & sent18 -> int4: the potter is not a crew.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the epicanthus is not forceless.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the epicanthus either does not fight Eliot or is a drawl or both.; int7 & sent24 -> int8: the epicanthus is analytic.; int8 & sent11 -> int9: the heifer is a suslik.; __UNKNOWN__