that there exists something such that the fact that it phases is not incorrect does not hold.
sent1: the boatman is not a explicitness if there exists something such that that either it is open-hearth or it is not a unapproachability or both does not hold. sent2: the GABA is not a explicitness if it is not articulate and it is nonnative. sent3: the GABA does not articulate if the waxycap is a kind of agrobiologic thing that tusks marguerite. sent4: that the waxycap is agrobiologic is not incorrect. sent5: the plantain is flatbed if the GABA is a communization but it is not proportionate. sent6: there is something such that it is open-hearth. sent7: the GABA is not articulate and it is not nonnative. sent8: something is non-agrobiologic thing that is not proportionate if it is not a communization. sent9: if the GABA is not a explicitness it does tusk marguerite. sent10: the GABA tusks marguerite. sent11: something is not open-hearth. sent12: the links is a unapproachability if there exists something such that it is not open-hearth. sent13: the links is not a explicitness if it is not a kind of a communization and it is not agrobiologic. sent14: if the GABA is not agrobiologic that the links is open-hearth and/or is not a unapproachability is incorrect. sent15: that the waiter is proportionate is not correct. sent16: the GABA is not a kind of a explicitness if it is not inarticulate and not nonnative. sent17: that the GABA is not proportionate is not false if the links is both a unapproachability and agrobiologic. sent18: the links is agrobiologic if the waxycap is agrobiologic. sent19: the GABA is proprioceptive. sent20: the waiter does phase if the plantain is a kind of a flatbed. sent21: if the GABA is both inarticulate and non-nonnative it is not a explicitness. sent22: the waxycap is agrobiologic if the waiter is a phase but not articulate. sent23: the GABA is a communization and it tusks marguerite if the fact that it is not a explicitness is correct. sent24: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Rush.
sent11 & sent12 -> int1: the links is a unapproachability.; sent18 & sent4 -> int2: the links is agrobiologic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the links is a unapproachability and it is agrobiologic.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the GABA is not proportionate.; sent21 & sent7 -> int5: the GABA is not a kind of a explicitness.; sent23 & int5 -> int6: the GABA is a kind of a communization and it does tusk marguerite.; int6 -> int7: the GABA is a kind of a communization.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the GABA is a communization but it is not proportionate.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the plantain is a flatbed.; int9 & sent20 -> int10: the waiter does phase.; int10 -> hypothesis;
the boatman is not a kind of a explicitness.
sent8 -> int11: if the GABA is not a kind of a communization then it is a kind of non-agrobiologic thing that is not proportionate.;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that the fact that it phases is not incorrect does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the boatman is not a explicitness if there exists something such that that either it is open-hearth or it is not a unapproachability or both does not hold. sent2: the GABA is not a explicitness if it is not articulate and it is nonnative. sent3: the GABA does not articulate if the waxycap is a kind of agrobiologic thing that tusks marguerite. sent4: that the waxycap is agrobiologic is not incorrect. sent5: the plantain is flatbed if the GABA is a communization but it is not proportionate. sent6: there is something such that it is open-hearth. sent7: the GABA is not articulate and it is not nonnative. sent8: something is non-agrobiologic thing that is not proportionate if it is not a communization. sent9: if the GABA is not a explicitness it does tusk marguerite. sent10: the GABA tusks marguerite. sent11: something is not open-hearth. sent12: the links is a unapproachability if there exists something such that it is not open-hearth. sent13: the links is not a explicitness if it is not a kind of a communization and it is not agrobiologic. sent14: if the GABA is not agrobiologic that the links is open-hearth and/or is not a unapproachability is incorrect. sent15: that the waiter is proportionate is not correct. sent16: the GABA is not a kind of a explicitness if it is not inarticulate and not nonnative. sent17: that the GABA is not proportionate is not false if the links is both a unapproachability and agrobiologic. sent18: the links is agrobiologic if the waxycap is agrobiologic. sent19: the GABA is proprioceptive. sent20: the waiter does phase if the plantain is a kind of a flatbed. sent21: if the GABA is both inarticulate and non-nonnative it is not a explicitness. sent22: the waxycap is agrobiologic if the waiter is a phase but not articulate. sent23: the GABA is a communization and it tusks marguerite if the fact that it is not a explicitness is correct. sent24: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Rush. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 & sent12 -> int1: the links is a unapproachability.; sent18 & sent4 -> int2: the links is agrobiologic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the links is a unapproachability and it is agrobiologic.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the GABA is not proportionate.; sent21 & sent7 -> int5: the GABA is not a kind of a explicitness.; sent23 & int5 -> int6: the GABA is a kind of a communization and it does tusk marguerite.; int6 -> int7: the GABA is a kind of a communization.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the GABA is a communization but it is not proportionate.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the plantain is a flatbed.; int9 & sent20 -> int10: the waiter does phase.; int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__