the fact that the Masonite is a kind of a continence is true.
sent1: The bubbliness repines sideburn. sent2: the can does answer OSHA if there exists something such that the fact that it does not answer OSHA and it repines blind does not hold. sent3: if the can is not Christological and answers OSHA the Masonite is a kind of a continence. sent4: if the bouillabaisse is a blast then the sideburn is endoparasitic. sent5: if there exists something such that it is not extensive then the fact that the wheeze does not answer OSHA and repines blind is not right. sent6: the bouillabaisse is a blast. sent7: something is not extensive. sent8: the sideburn repines bubbliness. sent9: if the sideburn is endoparasitic and it does repine bouillabaisse then the can is not Christological.
sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the sideburn is endoparasitic.; sent7 & sent5 -> int2: that that the wheeze does not answer OSHA but it does repine blind is not correct is correct.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that the fact that it does not answer OSHA and it repines blind is not correct.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the can does answer OSHA.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Masonite is a kind of a continence is true. ; $context$ = sent1: The bubbliness repines sideburn. sent2: the can does answer OSHA if there exists something such that the fact that it does not answer OSHA and it repines blind does not hold. sent3: if the can is not Christological and answers OSHA the Masonite is a kind of a continence. sent4: if the bouillabaisse is a blast then the sideburn is endoparasitic. sent5: if there exists something such that it is not extensive then the fact that the wheeze does not answer OSHA and repines blind is not right. sent6: the bouillabaisse is a blast. sent7: something is not extensive. sent8: the sideburn repines bubbliness. sent9: if the sideburn is endoparasitic and it does repine bouillabaisse then the can is not Christological. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the sideburn is endoparasitic.; sent7 & sent5 -> int2: that that the wheeze does not answer OSHA but it does repine blind is not correct is correct.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that the fact that it does not answer OSHA and it repines blind is not correct.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the can does answer OSHA.; __UNKNOWN__