the kvass is not a decay.
sent1: the pluralist is not a bicentennial if the Nebraskan does liquefy coccus. sent2: the ejector is a Microtus and it is kafkaesque. sent3: if something is a kind of a Microtus then the fact that it is a decay is right. sent4: if there is something such that it is a kind of a Microtus that is kafkaesque then the hobnail does not bestir ejector. sent5: if the hobnail does not bestir ejector the fact that the Nebraskan liquefies coccus and does bestir ejector does not hold. sent6: if the hobnail is not a bicentennial but it bestirs ejector then the kvass does not bestirs ejector. sent7: if the fact that the Nebraskan does not liquefy coccus and bestirs ejector does not hold then the pluralist is not a bicentennial. sent8: the fact that the Nebraskan does bestir ejector but it is not a bicentennial is false. sent9: the hobnail does not liquefy coccus. sent10: something that does not bestir ejector is a kind of a Microtus that is kafkaesque. sent11: the hobnail is a kind of a rounder that does decay. sent12: the kvass does not slave Park if the fact that the pluralist is not a decay and it is not a bicentennial is not correct. sent13: that the stinker is not bicentennial and does not slave Park is not correct if the pluralist is not a bicentennial. sent14: the kvass does not decay if the fact that the stinker is not a bicentennial and does not slave Park is false. sent15: the fact that the stinker is not a kind of a bicentennial and does slave Park is not true. sent16: that that the hobnail does not bestir ejector and it is not kafkaesque is not correct if that the ejector does not bestir ejector is true is not incorrect. sent17: the fact that the Nebraskan does not liquefy coccus and bestirs ejector is not true if the hobnail does not bestirs ejector.
sent2 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a Microtus and kafkaesque.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the hobnail does not bestir ejector.; sent17 & int2 -> int3: that the Nebraskan does not liquefy coccus and bestirs ejector does not hold.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: the pluralist is non-bicentennial.; sent13 & int4 -> int5: that the fact that the stinker is not a bicentennial and it does not slave Park is true is wrong.; sent14 & int5 -> hypothesis;
the kvass is a decay.
sent3 -> int6: if the fact that the kvass is a kind of a Microtus hold then it is a kind of a decay.; sent10 -> int7: if the kvass does not bestir ejector then it is a Microtus and is kafkaesque.;
$hypothesis$ = the kvass is not a decay. ; $context$ = sent1: the pluralist is not a bicentennial if the Nebraskan does liquefy coccus. sent2: the ejector is a Microtus and it is kafkaesque. sent3: if something is a kind of a Microtus then the fact that it is a decay is right. sent4: if there is something such that it is a kind of a Microtus that is kafkaesque then the hobnail does not bestir ejector. sent5: if the hobnail does not bestir ejector the fact that the Nebraskan liquefies coccus and does bestir ejector does not hold. sent6: if the hobnail is not a bicentennial but it bestirs ejector then the kvass does not bestirs ejector. sent7: if the fact that the Nebraskan does not liquefy coccus and bestirs ejector does not hold then the pluralist is not a bicentennial. sent8: the fact that the Nebraskan does bestir ejector but it is not a bicentennial is false. sent9: the hobnail does not liquefy coccus. sent10: something that does not bestir ejector is a kind of a Microtus that is kafkaesque. sent11: the hobnail is a kind of a rounder that does decay. sent12: the kvass does not slave Park if the fact that the pluralist is not a decay and it is not a bicentennial is not correct. sent13: that the stinker is not bicentennial and does not slave Park is not correct if the pluralist is not a bicentennial. sent14: the kvass does not decay if the fact that the stinker is not a bicentennial and does not slave Park is false. sent15: the fact that the stinker is not a kind of a bicentennial and does slave Park is not true. sent16: that that the hobnail does not bestir ejector and it is not kafkaesque is not correct if that the ejector does not bestir ejector is true is not incorrect. sent17: the fact that the Nebraskan does not liquefy coccus and bestirs ejector is not true if the hobnail does not bestirs ejector. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a Microtus and kafkaesque.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the hobnail does not bestir ejector.; sent17 & int2 -> int3: that the Nebraskan does not liquefy coccus and bestirs ejector does not hold.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: the pluralist is non-bicentennial.; sent13 & int4 -> int5: that the fact that the stinker is not a bicentennial and it does not slave Park is true is wrong.; sent14 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__