the fact that the Telugu is not a kind of a CSE and is not unilateral does not hold.
sent1: a Honduran bushes and/or does not articulate humdinger. sent2: if the cere is a hack the Telugu is not a CSE and is not unilateral. sent3: the squeegee does not hack. sent4: the contrarian is not unilateral. sent5: if the fact that the contrarian is not Honduran and not thermodynamics is not right the cere is Honduran. sent6: everything articulates humdinger. sent7: something that does articulate humdinger does not bush. sent8: if something is a bush and/or does not articulate humdinger it is a hack. sent9: the pruning is not a kind of a psychotherapist if something either is not a kind of a styracosaur or is not a psychotherapist or both. sent10: that the cere is a indigence and is not unilateral is not correct. sent11: the fact that the contrarian is a kind of a indigence but it is not inoffensive does not hold if the cere is unilateral. sent12: if the cere is not unilateral then the fact that the Telugu is not a CSE and is not unilateral is not correct. sent13: the tablecloth is not a styracosaur and/or it is not a kind of a psychotherapist. sent14: if that something is a kind of a indigence that is not inoffensive is wrong it is not a hack. sent15: if the fact that the fact that the Telugu is a hack but not a CSE is not right is correct then it is not unilateral. sent16: the fact that something is a kind of metacentric thing that is not passionate is not true if it is not a design. sent17: that the cere does hack but it is not a CSE does not hold if the Telugu is unilateral. sent18: that the Telugu is not a CSE and is unilateral does not hold if the cere is not unilateral. sent19: if that something is metacentric but it is not passionate is false then it is not metacentric. sent20: that the cere is inoffensive is correct. sent21: the fact that the contrarian is a kind of non-Honduran thing that is not thermodynamics is false if the weaponry is not metacentric.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cere is unilateral.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the contrarian is a kind of a indigence but it is not inoffensive is not right.; sent14 -> int2: if the fact that the contrarian is a indigence and is not inoffensive is not true then it does not hack.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the contrarian is not a kind of a hack.;
the fact that the Nebuchadnezzar is not a hack is true.
sent7 -> int4: if the contrarian does articulate humdinger it does not bush.; sent6 -> int5: the fact that the contrarian articulates humdinger is true.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the contrarian does not bush.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Telugu is not a kind of a CSE and is not unilateral does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: a Honduran bushes and/or does not articulate humdinger. sent2: if the cere is a hack the Telugu is not a CSE and is not unilateral. sent3: the squeegee does not hack. sent4: the contrarian is not unilateral. sent5: if the fact that the contrarian is not Honduran and not thermodynamics is not right the cere is Honduran. sent6: everything articulates humdinger. sent7: something that does articulate humdinger does not bush. sent8: if something is a bush and/or does not articulate humdinger it is a hack. sent9: the pruning is not a kind of a psychotherapist if something either is not a kind of a styracosaur or is not a psychotherapist or both. sent10: that the cere is a indigence and is not unilateral is not correct. sent11: the fact that the contrarian is a kind of a indigence but it is not inoffensive does not hold if the cere is unilateral. sent12: if the cere is not unilateral then the fact that the Telugu is not a CSE and is not unilateral is not correct. sent13: the tablecloth is not a styracosaur and/or it is not a kind of a psychotherapist. sent14: if that something is a kind of a indigence that is not inoffensive is wrong it is not a hack. sent15: if the fact that the fact that the Telugu is a hack but not a CSE is not right is correct then it is not unilateral. sent16: the fact that something is a kind of metacentric thing that is not passionate is not true if it is not a design. sent17: that the cere does hack but it is not a CSE does not hold if the Telugu is unilateral. sent18: that the Telugu is not a CSE and is unilateral does not hold if the cere is not unilateral. sent19: if that something is metacentric but it is not passionate is false then it is not metacentric. sent20: that the cere is inoffensive is correct. sent21: the fact that the contrarian is a kind of non-Honduran thing that is not thermodynamics is false if the weaponry is not metacentric. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cere is unilateral.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the contrarian is a kind of a indigence but it is not inoffensive is not right.; sent14 -> int2: if the fact that the contrarian is a indigence and is not inoffensive is not true then it does not hack.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the contrarian is not a kind of a hack.; __UNKNOWN__