the frijole does look frijole.
sent1: if the frijole is not onstage that that it fidgets phlebectomy and it is not precocial hold is not true. sent2: something is Angolan and it is unobvious if it does not skydive. sent3: if something that skydives is a Dali it is not a stakeholder. sent4: the sirloin does not score. sent5: the frijole is unobvious. sent6: the dervish does not score if the fact that it is clonal and it is not a Trappist is not right. sent7: if something is not obvious and does not skydive then that it does not look frijole is not false. sent8: if something is not a Dali then it looks frijole. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it does not look freemail and it does not look frijole is not right the meatball is a kind of a Dali. sent10: if there is something such that it does not look Hunt then the meatball does look freemail. sent11: the frijole is a kind of a score if there is something such that the fact that it does look frijole and it does not look freemail is not right. sent12: if something is not a kind of a score then that it does not look freemail and it does not look frijole is wrong. sent13: there is something such that that it looks Hunt and it is ontological does not hold. sent14: the sirloin does not look frijole. sent15: the meatball does look freemail if there exists something such that that it does look Hunt and is not ontological is incorrect. sent16: the meatball does not look freemail if the fact that the frijole is not a stakeholder is not false. sent17: the frijole is unobvious and skydives. sent18: that the sirloin is not a kind of a stakeholder is not wrong if the fact that it looks freemail and scores is not incorrect. sent19: there exists something such that the fact that it is a seizure and it does vote is not true. sent20: if the sirloin does not score then the fact that it looks Hunt and it is not ontological is false. sent21: something looks Hunt and is not ontological. sent22: the sirloin skydives. sent23: the meatball is a stakeholder if the fact that the fact that the sirloin is not ontological but it does look Hunt is false is not wrong. sent24: the fact that the sirloin is a kind of non-ontological thing that looks Hunt is not correct if it is a zymology. sent25: the sirloin is unobvious. sent26: that the dervish is clonal and is not a Trappist is not right.
sent17 -> int1: the frijole does skydive.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the frijole is a kind of a Dali.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the frijole skydives and is a kind of a Dali.; sent3 -> int3: if the frijole skydives and is a kind of a Dali then it is not a stakeholder.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the frijole is not a kind of a stakeholder.; int4 & sent16 -> int5: the meatball does not look freemail.; sent20 & sent4 -> int6: the fact that the sirloin does look Hunt but it is not ontological is not true.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it looks Hunt and is not ontological is incorrect.; int7 & sent15 -> int8: the fact that the meatball looks freemail is not wrong.; int5 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the frijole is not a kind of a Dali.; sent8 -> int11: the frijole looks frijole if that it is not a Dali hold.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis;
the frijole does not look frijole.
sent7 -> int12: if the frijole is unobvious and does not skydive then the fact that it does not look frijole is not incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = the frijole does look frijole. ; $context$ = sent1: if the frijole is not onstage that that it fidgets phlebectomy and it is not precocial hold is not true. sent2: something is Angolan and it is unobvious if it does not skydive. sent3: if something that skydives is a Dali it is not a stakeholder. sent4: the sirloin does not score. sent5: the frijole is unobvious. sent6: the dervish does not score if the fact that it is clonal and it is not a Trappist is not right. sent7: if something is not obvious and does not skydive then that it does not look frijole is not false. sent8: if something is not a Dali then it looks frijole. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it does not look freemail and it does not look frijole is not right the meatball is a kind of a Dali. sent10: if there is something such that it does not look Hunt then the meatball does look freemail. sent11: the frijole is a kind of a score if there is something such that the fact that it does look frijole and it does not look freemail is not right. sent12: if something is not a kind of a score then that it does not look freemail and it does not look frijole is wrong. sent13: there is something such that that it looks Hunt and it is ontological does not hold. sent14: the sirloin does not look frijole. sent15: the meatball does look freemail if there exists something such that that it does look Hunt and is not ontological is incorrect. sent16: the meatball does not look freemail if the fact that the frijole is not a stakeholder is not false. sent17: the frijole is unobvious and skydives. sent18: that the sirloin is not a kind of a stakeholder is not wrong if the fact that it looks freemail and scores is not incorrect. sent19: there exists something such that the fact that it is a seizure and it does vote is not true. sent20: if the sirloin does not score then the fact that it looks Hunt and it is not ontological is false. sent21: something looks Hunt and is not ontological. sent22: the sirloin skydives. sent23: the meatball is a stakeholder if the fact that the fact that the sirloin is not ontological but it does look Hunt is false is not wrong. sent24: the fact that the sirloin is a kind of non-ontological thing that looks Hunt is not correct if it is a zymology. sent25: the sirloin is unobvious. sent26: that the dervish is clonal and is not a Trappist is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 -> int1: the frijole does skydive.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the frijole is a kind of a Dali.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the frijole skydives and is a kind of a Dali.; sent3 -> int3: if the frijole skydives and is a kind of a Dali then it is not a stakeholder.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the frijole is not a kind of a stakeholder.; int4 & sent16 -> int5: the meatball does not look freemail.; sent20 & sent4 -> int6: the fact that the sirloin does look Hunt but it is not ontological is not true.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it looks Hunt and is not ontological is incorrect.; int7 & sent15 -> int8: the fact that the meatball looks freemail is not wrong.; int5 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the frijole is not a kind of a Dali.; sent8 -> int11: the frijole looks frijole if that it is not a Dali hold.; int10 & int11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__