the fact that the flourish is off-line and not a paintbrush is not true.
sent1: if that the phenolic enslaves Mytilidae but it is not onymous is incorrect it does not enslaves Mytilidae. sent2: if the orientalist is a spillover that the flourish is non-syntactic and non-nautical does not hold. sent3: if the orientalist is a spillover and is a paintbrush then it is genetic. sent4: the constrictor is not genetic if the phenolic is metallurgical and it is a pasta. sent5: the fact that something is off-line but it is not a paintbrush does not hold if that it does enslave Mytilidae is not false. sent6: if the phenolic is a coinage and it is terminal then it is metallurgical. sent7: if the phenolic is not a pasta then the orientalist is a spillover. sent8: the fact that the phenolic is a spillover but it is not terminal is incorrect. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it spoons constrictor and is not genetic does not hold then the constrictor is not genetic. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it is a silhouette and not a disulfiram is not true. sent11: if the fact that something is both not metallurgical and not pasta does not hold then it is off-line. sent12: the flourish is not genetic if the constrictor is syntactic and it is genetic. sent13: the fact that something is not metallurgical and it is not a pasta is not true if it is not genetic. sent14: the orientalist is not nautical. sent15: the phenolic is metallurgical if it is both a coinage and not terminal. sent16: the fact that the phenolic is a coinage and syntactic is wrong if it is not non-genetic. sent17: the phenolic is both a coinage and not a terminal. sent18: there is nothing such that it spoons constrictor and it is not genetic. sent19: if the fact that something is not impetiginous and not apocryphal does not hold it is Bosnian. sent20: if that the phenolic does not enslave Mytilidae is not incorrect that it is both a paintbrush and a spillover does not hold. sent21: that something does enslave Mytilidae but it is not onymous is wrong if it does spoon constrictor.
sent15 & sent17 -> int1: the phenolic is metallurgical.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the phenolic is a kind of a pasta.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the phenolic is metallurgical and it is not non-pasta.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the constrictor is not genetic.; sent18 -> int4: the fact that the teal does spoon constrictor and is not genetic does not hold.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that the fact that it spoons constrictor and it is not genetic is wrong.; int5 & sent9 -> int6: the constrictor is genetic.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the phenolic is not a kind of a pasta.; int8 & sent7 -> int9: the orientalist is a spillover.; int9 & sent2 -> int10: that the flourish is not syntactic and not nautical is wrong.; sent5 -> int11: that the flourish is off-line thing that is not a paintbrush is wrong if it does enslave Mytilidae.;
the flourish is not non-off-line and not a paintbrush.
sent14 -> int12: there exists something such that it is not nautical.; sent13 -> int13: the fact that the flourish is not metallurgical and it is not a pasta is not right if it is not genetic.; sent11 -> int14: the flourish is off-line if the fact that it is not metallurgical and it is not pasta does not hold.; sent21 -> int15: the fact that the teal enslaves Mytilidae but it is not onymous is incorrect if it does spoon constrictor.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the flourish is off-line and not a paintbrush is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the phenolic enslaves Mytilidae but it is not onymous is incorrect it does not enslaves Mytilidae. sent2: if the orientalist is a spillover that the flourish is non-syntactic and non-nautical does not hold. sent3: if the orientalist is a spillover and is a paintbrush then it is genetic. sent4: the constrictor is not genetic if the phenolic is metallurgical and it is a pasta. sent5: the fact that something is off-line but it is not a paintbrush does not hold if that it does enslave Mytilidae is not false. sent6: if the phenolic is a coinage and it is terminal then it is metallurgical. sent7: if the phenolic is not a pasta then the orientalist is a spillover. sent8: the fact that the phenolic is a spillover but it is not terminal is incorrect. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it spoons constrictor and is not genetic does not hold then the constrictor is not genetic. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it is a silhouette and not a disulfiram is not true. sent11: if the fact that something is both not metallurgical and not pasta does not hold then it is off-line. sent12: the flourish is not genetic if the constrictor is syntactic and it is genetic. sent13: the fact that something is not metallurgical and it is not a pasta is not true if it is not genetic. sent14: the orientalist is not nautical. sent15: the phenolic is metallurgical if it is both a coinage and not terminal. sent16: the fact that the phenolic is a coinage and syntactic is wrong if it is not non-genetic. sent17: the phenolic is both a coinage and not a terminal. sent18: there is nothing such that it spoons constrictor and it is not genetic. sent19: if the fact that something is not impetiginous and not apocryphal does not hold it is Bosnian. sent20: if that the phenolic does not enslave Mytilidae is not incorrect that it is both a paintbrush and a spillover does not hold. sent21: that something does enslave Mytilidae but it is not onymous is wrong if it does spoon constrictor. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 & sent17 -> int1: the phenolic is metallurgical.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the phenolic is a kind of a pasta.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the phenolic is metallurgical and it is not non-pasta.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the constrictor is not genetic.; sent18 -> int4: the fact that the teal does spoon constrictor and is not genetic does not hold.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that the fact that it spoons constrictor and it is not genetic is wrong.; int5 & sent9 -> int6: the constrictor is genetic.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the phenolic is not a kind of a pasta.; int8 & sent7 -> int9: the orientalist is a spillover.; int9 & sent2 -> int10: that the flourish is not syntactic and not nautical is wrong.; sent5 -> int11: that the flourish is off-line thing that is not a paintbrush is wrong if it does enslave Mytilidae.; __UNKNOWN__