the kittiwake does not eulogize glycol.
sent1: the thermostat is insoluble. sent2: if something is quiet then it is a kind of non-insoluble a brunet. sent3: if the Mull is not insoluble that the finisher is not a brig and it is not a brunet is not correct. sent4: if the anaglyphy does not render drudging the Mull is a amylase and it is a kind of a leukocyte. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a brig and not a brunet is wrong then the thermostat is a kind of a brig. sent6: the anaglyphy does not render drudging. sent7: the kittiwake does eulogize Kosovo if it does stifle squinch. sent8: everything is insoluble. sent9: the thermostat is a kind of a brunet. sent10: if something that is not insoluble is a brunet that the dichloromethane stifles plumbago is correct. sent11: if the fact that something eulogizes bombing or it does not stifle squinch or both does not hold then it is a brig. sent12: the thermostat is quiet and it is geriatrics if the finisher does not remainder Waco. sent13: everything does remainder falsie and it is astomatal. sent14: something does not remainder Waco if that it is not a kind of a modem and it is a kind of a toiler does not hold. sent15: the dichloromethane is a brig if the thermostat is brunet. sent16: if the kittiwake is a kind of a brig it eulogizes bombing. sent17: something that eulogizes bombing stifles squinch. sent18: if the kittiwake does stifle plumbago it does remainder Waco. sent19: the kittiwake does eulogize glycol and it does stifle squinch if the dichloromethane does not eulogize bombing. sent20: that the kittiwake is insoluble is not wrong. sent21: if the fact that the dichloromethane stifles plumbago is not false that the consort does eulogize bombing and/or does not stifle squinch is not true. sent22: if that the kittiwake stifles squinch and stifles plumbago is right the dichloromethane is not a brig. sent23: the fact that everything does stifle plumbago and is insoluble is not false. sent24: if something eulogizes glycol it eulogizes bombing. sent25: that the thermostat does stifle squinch is not wrong. sent26: if the dichloromethane stifles squinch then the kittiwake stifles plumbago.
sent24 -> int1: if the fact that the kittiwake eulogizes glycol is correct it eulogizes bombing.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kittiwake does eulogize glycol.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the kittiwake eulogizes bombing.; sent17 -> int3: the kittiwake does stifle squinch if the fact that it eulogizes bombing is not false.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the kittiwake does stifle squinch.; sent23 -> int5: the kittiwake does stifle plumbago and it is insoluble.; int5 -> int6: the kittiwake stifles plumbago.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the kittiwake stifles squinch and it stifles plumbago.; int7 & sent22 -> int8: the dichloromethane is not a brig.; sent15 & sent9 -> int9: the dichloromethane is a brig.; int8 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis;
the kittiwake does eulogize glycol.
$hypothesis$ = the kittiwake does not eulogize glycol. ; $context$ = sent1: the thermostat is insoluble. sent2: if something is quiet then it is a kind of non-insoluble a brunet. sent3: if the Mull is not insoluble that the finisher is not a brig and it is not a brunet is not correct. sent4: if the anaglyphy does not render drudging the Mull is a amylase and it is a kind of a leukocyte. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a brig and not a brunet is wrong then the thermostat is a kind of a brig. sent6: the anaglyphy does not render drudging. sent7: the kittiwake does eulogize Kosovo if it does stifle squinch. sent8: everything is insoluble. sent9: the thermostat is a kind of a brunet. sent10: if something that is not insoluble is a brunet that the dichloromethane stifles plumbago is correct. sent11: if the fact that something eulogizes bombing or it does not stifle squinch or both does not hold then it is a brig. sent12: the thermostat is quiet and it is geriatrics if the finisher does not remainder Waco. sent13: everything does remainder falsie and it is astomatal. sent14: something does not remainder Waco if that it is not a kind of a modem and it is a kind of a toiler does not hold. sent15: the dichloromethane is a brig if the thermostat is brunet. sent16: if the kittiwake is a kind of a brig it eulogizes bombing. sent17: something that eulogizes bombing stifles squinch. sent18: if the kittiwake does stifle plumbago it does remainder Waco. sent19: the kittiwake does eulogize glycol and it does stifle squinch if the dichloromethane does not eulogize bombing. sent20: that the kittiwake is insoluble is not wrong. sent21: if the fact that the dichloromethane stifles plumbago is not false that the consort does eulogize bombing and/or does not stifle squinch is not true. sent22: if that the kittiwake stifles squinch and stifles plumbago is right the dichloromethane is not a brig. sent23: the fact that everything does stifle plumbago and is insoluble is not false. sent24: if something eulogizes glycol it eulogizes bombing. sent25: that the thermostat does stifle squinch is not wrong. sent26: if the dichloromethane stifles squinch then the kittiwake stifles plumbago. ; $proof$ = 
sent24 -> int1: if the fact that the kittiwake eulogizes glycol is correct it eulogizes bombing.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kittiwake does eulogize glycol.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the kittiwake eulogizes bombing.; sent17 -> int3: the kittiwake does stifle squinch if the fact that it eulogizes bombing is not false.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the kittiwake does stifle squinch.; sent23 -> int5: the kittiwake does stifle plumbago and it is insoluble.; int5 -> int6: the kittiwake stifles plumbago.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the kittiwake stifles squinch and it stifles plumbago.; int7 & sent22 -> int8: the dichloromethane is not a brig.; sent15 & sent9 -> int9: the dichloromethane is a brig.; int8 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__