the Muslim does catalyze bilby and is a healthiness.
sent1: if the bilby tells and does fingerprint pretext it is not likable. sent2: the fact that if the sniper slices Mali and/or is a gouger the bilby is not eolithic is not incorrect. sent3: the bilby does not tell if that it is not eolithic is true. sent4: the bilby is not eolithic if the sniper slices Mali. sent5: the Bastille does not fingerprint pretext. sent6: something does not tell but it does fingerprint pretext if it is not eolithic. sent7: if the fact that the torero is not likable and does instrument buttonhook is true the bilby is not likable. sent8: the laudator is not likable if it does not catalyze bilby and it does catalyze Muslim. sent9: something does not tell if it is non-eolithic. sent10: the torero is not likable but it does instrument buttonhook. sent11: the bilby does not tell. sent12: the bilby is not a healthiness. sent13: if something does not slice Mali then the fact that it does catalyze bilby and it is a healthiness is wrong. sent14: the Muslim does catalyze bilby and is a healthiness if the laudator does not catalyze Muslim. sent15: the bilby is not likable if it does not tell and it does fingerprint pretext. sent16: the fact that the torero does not instrument buttonhook hold if it does not slice Mali and it is eolithic. sent17: the laudator is not a healthiness. sent18: something is a gouger. sent19: if the sniper is not likable it is not a kind of a gouger and does catalyze bilby. sent20: the torero instruments buttonhook. sent21: if something does tell and does not fingerprint pretext then the sniper is not eolithic. sent22: if the torero does not tell and is not non-likable the bilby does tell. sent23: if that something slices Mali but it is not a gouger is false the fact that it is not a kind of a healthiness hold. sent24: if something is not a gouger the laudator does not catalyze Muslim. sent25: the spitter is not eolithic. sent26: if the laudator does not catalyze Muslim then the fact that the Muslim is a healthiness is true. sent27: the fact that something does slice Mali but it is not a kind of a gouger is not right if it is not eolithic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sniper is a gouger.; assump1 -> int1: the sniper slices Mali and/or it is a gouger.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the bilby is not eolithic.; sent6 -> int3: if the bilby is not eolithic it does not tell and fingerprints pretext.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the bilby does not tell but it fingerprints pretext.; int4 & sent15 -> int5: the bilby is non-likable.; sent7 & sent10 -> int6: the bilby is likable.; int5 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the sniper is not a gouger.; int8 -> int9: something is not a gouger.; int9 & sent24 -> int10: the laudator does not catalyze Muslim.; int10 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the Muslim catalyzes bilby and is a healthiness is incorrect.
sent23 -> int11: if the fact that the sniper slices Mali and is not a gouger is not correct then it is not a healthiness.; sent27 -> int12: that the sniper does slice Mali but it is not a gouger is wrong if it is not eolithic.;
$hypothesis$ = the Muslim does catalyze bilby and is a healthiness. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bilby tells and does fingerprint pretext it is not likable. sent2: the fact that if the sniper slices Mali and/or is a gouger the bilby is not eolithic is not incorrect. sent3: the bilby does not tell if that it is not eolithic is true. sent4: the bilby is not eolithic if the sniper slices Mali. sent5: the Bastille does not fingerprint pretext. sent6: something does not tell but it does fingerprint pretext if it is not eolithic. sent7: if the fact that the torero is not likable and does instrument buttonhook is true the bilby is not likable. sent8: the laudator is not likable if it does not catalyze bilby and it does catalyze Muslim. sent9: something does not tell if it is non-eolithic. sent10: the torero is not likable but it does instrument buttonhook. sent11: the bilby does not tell. sent12: the bilby is not a healthiness. sent13: if something does not slice Mali then the fact that it does catalyze bilby and it is a healthiness is wrong. sent14: the Muslim does catalyze bilby and is a healthiness if the laudator does not catalyze Muslim. sent15: the bilby is not likable if it does not tell and it does fingerprint pretext. sent16: the fact that the torero does not instrument buttonhook hold if it does not slice Mali and it is eolithic. sent17: the laudator is not a healthiness. sent18: something is a gouger. sent19: if the sniper is not likable it is not a kind of a gouger and does catalyze bilby. sent20: the torero instruments buttonhook. sent21: if something does tell and does not fingerprint pretext then the sniper is not eolithic. sent22: if the torero does not tell and is not non-likable the bilby does tell. sent23: if that something slices Mali but it is not a gouger is false the fact that it is not a kind of a healthiness hold. sent24: if something is not a gouger the laudator does not catalyze Muslim. sent25: the spitter is not eolithic. sent26: if the laudator does not catalyze Muslim then the fact that the Muslim is a healthiness is true. sent27: the fact that something does slice Mali but it is not a kind of a gouger is not right if it is not eolithic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sniper is a gouger.; assump1 -> int1: the sniper slices Mali and/or it is a gouger.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the bilby is not eolithic.; sent6 -> int3: if the bilby is not eolithic it does not tell and fingerprints pretext.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the bilby does not tell but it fingerprints pretext.; int4 & sent15 -> int5: the bilby is non-likable.; sent7 & sent10 -> int6: the bilby is likable.; int5 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the sniper is not a gouger.; int8 -> int9: something is not a gouger.; int9 & sent24 -> int10: the laudator does not catalyze Muslim.; int10 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__