there is something such that if that it is a tree and it does not correspond bisexual is wrong it is not an impressionist.
sent1: the wood-rat is not efficient if it is a kind of a differential and it does not correspond bisexual. sent2: something is convertible if the fact that it is a kind of a Kazan that does not preamble is not true. sent3: something is not an impressionist if the fact that it is a kind of a tree and it does correspond bisexual is not true. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it does antisepticize yore and it does not correspond fisher is incorrect it is not pyretic. sent5: there exists something such that if it trees and it does not correspond bisexual then it is not impressionist. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not tree then it is not impressionist. sent7: if the bisexual is unrealistic but it does not correspond bisexual that it is non-sternutatory is true. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it does antisepticize wood-rat and it is non-antiphonary does not hold it is not a gentile. sent9: if the fact that the candy does clash and does not tree is incorrect it is a kind of a Lesbian. sent10: if the fact that the wood-rat avoids Machiavellianism but it is not meager does not hold then it is impressionist. sent11: a antiphonary that does not clash does not experience. sent12: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a tree that corresponds bisexual does not hold it is not impressionist. sent13: if that something is audiometric but it is not distal is incorrect then it is not alkylic. sent14: if that that something is a kind of a tree but it does not correspond bisexual is correct is not right it is not an impressionist. sent15: something is not a sudoku if the fact that it does not avoid omelet is not wrong. sent16: the wood-rat is not an impressionist if it is not a kind of a tree.
sent14 -> int1: the fact that the wood-rat is not the impressionist if that the wood-rat is a tree and does not correspond bisexual is not true is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it is a tree and it does not correspond bisexual is wrong it is not an impressionist. ; $context$ = sent1: the wood-rat is not efficient if it is a kind of a differential and it does not correspond bisexual. sent2: something is convertible if the fact that it is a kind of a Kazan that does not preamble is not true. sent3: something is not an impressionist if the fact that it is a kind of a tree and it does correspond bisexual is not true. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it does antisepticize yore and it does not correspond fisher is incorrect it is not pyretic. sent5: there exists something such that if it trees and it does not correspond bisexual then it is not impressionist. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not tree then it is not impressionist. sent7: if the bisexual is unrealistic but it does not correspond bisexual that it is non-sternutatory is true. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it does antisepticize wood-rat and it is non-antiphonary does not hold it is not a gentile. sent9: if the fact that the candy does clash and does not tree is incorrect it is a kind of a Lesbian. sent10: if the fact that the wood-rat avoids Machiavellianism but it is not meager does not hold then it is impressionist. sent11: a antiphonary that does not clash does not experience. sent12: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a tree that corresponds bisexual does not hold it is not impressionist. sent13: if that something is audiometric but it is not distal is incorrect then it is not alkylic. sent14: if that that something is a kind of a tree but it does not correspond bisexual is correct is not right it is not an impressionist. sent15: something is not a sudoku if the fact that it does not avoid omelet is not wrong. sent16: the wood-rat is not an impressionist if it is not a kind of a tree. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: the fact that the wood-rat is not the impressionist if that the wood-rat is a tree and does not correspond bisexual is not true is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__