the fact that that the gallfly does not approbate ruff and does not cope is true is not right.
sent1: that something does not approbate ruff and it is not a cope is incorrect if it does not depose Sousse. sent2: if something does not depose Sousse that it does not approbate ruff and is a cope is not true. sent3: if there exists something such that that it does cloy Semitic and it is not a stupid is not true the quinacrine is not a pied-a-terre. sent4: the fact that the gallfly does approbate ruff and does not cope is incorrect. sent5: the gallfly is not a pied-a-terre and is not a kind of a nomad. sent6: if the gallfly is not a pied-a-terre and it is not a nomad the fact that it does not depose Sousse is not wrong. sent7: if something does not depose Sousse then the fact that it is non-near thing that is not a pied-a-terre is not correct. sent8: the fact that something cloys Semitic but it is not a stupid is false if it is a kind of a piddock. sent9: if something does not depose Sousse that it does approbate ruff and is not a cope is wrong. sent10: that the nitrification does not depose Sousse is correct. sent11: if the gallfly does not depose Sousse then that it approbates ruff and is not a cope is false. sent12: if the gallfly is a kind of a pied-a-terre but it is not a kind of a nomad it does not depose Sousse. sent13: the fact that the gallfly does not approbate ruff and is a cope is false. sent14: something is a kind of a piddock if it is a sequence. sent15: that something does not stagger and does not cloy Unionidae is incorrect if it is not an imperialism. sent16: the dentine does not depose Sousse. sent17: the Trilby does not depose Sousse but it is a kind of a nomad if the quinacrine is not a pied-a-terre. sent18: that the gallfly does not approbate ruff and is a kind of a cope is wrong if it does not depose Sousse. sent19: if the Trilby does not depose Sousse but it is a nomad the infiltrator depose Sousse. sent20: the gallfly is non-cancroid thing that is not a kind of a rattle. sent21: the gallfly is not a pitting. sent22: the hypermastigote sequences and it is psycholinguistic.
sent1 -> int1: if the gallfly does not depose Sousse the fact that it does not approbate ruff and it is not a cope is wrong.; sent6 & sent5 -> int2: the gallfly does not depose Sousse.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;
the gallfly does not approbate ruff and it is not a kind of a cope.
sent8 -> int3: the fact that the hypermastigote does cloy Semitic and is not a kind of a stupid does not hold if it is a piddock.; sent14 -> int4: if the hypermastigote is a kind of a sequence then it is a piddock.; sent22 -> int5: the hypermastigote does sequence.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the hypermastigote is a piddock.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the hypermastigote does cloy Semitic but it is not a kind of a stupid is incorrect.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that the fact that it cloys Semitic and is non-stupid is wrong.; int8 & sent3 -> int9: the quinacrine is not a kind of a pied-a-terre.; sent17 & int9 -> int10: the Trilby does not depose Sousse and is a kind of a nomad.; sent19 & int10 -> int11: the infiltrator deposes Sousse.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that it deposes Sousse.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the gallfly does not approbate ruff and does not cope is true is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not approbate ruff and it is not a cope is incorrect if it does not depose Sousse. sent2: if something does not depose Sousse that it does not approbate ruff and is a cope is not true. sent3: if there exists something such that that it does cloy Semitic and it is not a stupid is not true the quinacrine is not a pied-a-terre. sent4: the fact that the gallfly does approbate ruff and does not cope is incorrect. sent5: the gallfly is not a pied-a-terre and is not a kind of a nomad. sent6: if the gallfly is not a pied-a-terre and it is not a nomad the fact that it does not depose Sousse is not wrong. sent7: if something does not depose Sousse then the fact that it is non-near thing that is not a pied-a-terre is not correct. sent8: the fact that something cloys Semitic but it is not a stupid is false if it is a kind of a piddock. sent9: if something does not depose Sousse that it does approbate ruff and is not a cope is wrong. sent10: that the nitrification does not depose Sousse is correct. sent11: if the gallfly does not depose Sousse then that it approbates ruff and is not a cope is false. sent12: if the gallfly is a kind of a pied-a-terre but it is not a kind of a nomad it does not depose Sousse. sent13: the fact that the gallfly does not approbate ruff and is a cope is false. sent14: something is a kind of a piddock if it is a sequence. sent15: that something does not stagger and does not cloy Unionidae is incorrect if it is not an imperialism. sent16: the dentine does not depose Sousse. sent17: the Trilby does not depose Sousse but it is a kind of a nomad if the quinacrine is not a pied-a-terre. sent18: that the gallfly does not approbate ruff and is a kind of a cope is wrong if it does not depose Sousse. sent19: if the Trilby does not depose Sousse but it is a nomad the infiltrator depose Sousse. sent20: the gallfly is non-cancroid thing that is not a kind of a rattle. sent21: the gallfly is not a pitting. sent22: the hypermastigote sequences and it is psycholinguistic. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: if the gallfly does not depose Sousse the fact that it does not approbate ruff and it is not a cope is wrong.; sent6 & sent5 -> int2: the gallfly does not depose Sousse.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__