the rival is not a Typhoeus.
sent1: if that the buckskins is a desorption but not parenteral is not right the bouffant is not automatic. sent2: the bouffant is not a Sabbatarian. sent3: The lepidopterist bops bouffant. sent4: the rival is not a kind of a Sabbatarian if there exists something such that it bops lepidopterist. sent5: if the bouffant is not vocational and is not unexchangeable then the rival is not a Typhoeus. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it does undress Monardella and it is not an anna is not right the fact that the wagonwright is not vocational is not wrong. sent7: the rival is not unexchangeable if the wagonwright is not stomatous. sent8: that the tiger malingers trifle is not wrong if the poisoner is not a get. sent9: if something is Sabbatarian and it does bop lepidopterist then the fact that it is not unexchangeable is not false. sent10: the wagonwright is not a kind of a Typhoeus. sent11: something undresses Monardella and is not a kind of an anna. sent12: if the dumdum is ambitious the techie either is not an anna or does not undress Monardella or both. sent13: the fact that something is a Sabbatarian and it does bop lepidopterist if it is not an automatic is correct. sent14: there exists something such that that it undresses Monardella and it is an anna does not hold. sent15: that the wagonwright is not vocational is correct if something is an anna. sent16: the poisoner is not a rearguard or it is not a kind of a get or both. sent17: if there is something such that it malingers trifle then the dumdum is ambitious and is a kind of a telegrapher. sent18: if the poisoner is not a kind of a rearguard then the tiger does malinger trifle. sent19: the bouffant is not vocational if the techie is not an anna and/or does not undress Monardella. sent20: something that is not iliac but stomatous is vocational. sent21: there exists something such that that it does undress Monardella and is not an anna does not hold. sent22: the rival is a Typhoeus if it is not unexchangeable and not a Sabbatarian. sent23: the bouffant bops lepidopterist. sent24: the wagonwright is stomatous. sent25: the rival is exchangeable if the fact that the wagonwright is both not iliac and stomatous is not true.
sent20 -> int1: the wagonwright is vocational if it is both not iliac and stomatous.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wagonwright is a kind of non-iliac thing that is stomatous.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the wagonwright is vocational.; sent21 & sent6 -> int3: that the wagonwright is not vocational hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the wagonwright is not iliac but it is stomatous is incorrect.; int5 & sent25 -> int6: the rival is not unexchangeable.; sent23 -> int7: there is something such that it bops lepidopterist.; int7 & sent4 -> int8: the rival is not a kind of a Sabbatarian.; int6 & int8 -> int9: the rival is not unexchangeable and not a Sabbatarian.; int9 & sent22 -> hypothesis;
the rival is not a Typhoeus.
sent16 & sent18 & sent8 -> int10: the tiger malingers trifle.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that the fact that it does malinger trifle hold.; int11 & sent17 -> int12: the dumdum is a kind of ambitious thing that is a kind of a telegrapher.; int12 -> int13: the dumdum is ambitious.; sent12 & int13 -> int14: the techie is not an anna or it does not undress Monardella or both.; sent19 & int14 -> int15: the bouffant is not vocational.; sent9 -> int16: if the bouffant is a Sabbatarian and does bop lepidopterist the fact that it is not unexchangeable is correct.; sent13 -> int17: the bouffant is not non-Sabbatarian and bops lepidopterist if the fact that it is not an automatic is correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the rival is not a Typhoeus. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the buckskins is a desorption but not parenteral is not right the bouffant is not automatic. sent2: the bouffant is not a Sabbatarian. sent3: The lepidopterist bops bouffant. sent4: the rival is not a kind of a Sabbatarian if there exists something such that it bops lepidopterist. sent5: if the bouffant is not vocational and is not unexchangeable then the rival is not a Typhoeus. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it does undress Monardella and it is not an anna is not right the fact that the wagonwright is not vocational is not wrong. sent7: the rival is not unexchangeable if the wagonwright is not stomatous. sent8: that the tiger malingers trifle is not wrong if the poisoner is not a get. sent9: if something is Sabbatarian and it does bop lepidopterist then the fact that it is not unexchangeable is not false. sent10: the wagonwright is not a kind of a Typhoeus. sent11: something undresses Monardella and is not a kind of an anna. sent12: if the dumdum is ambitious the techie either is not an anna or does not undress Monardella or both. sent13: the fact that something is a Sabbatarian and it does bop lepidopterist if it is not an automatic is correct. sent14: there exists something such that that it undresses Monardella and it is an anna does not hold. sent15: that the wagonwright is not vocational is correct if something is an anna. sent16: the poisoner is not a rearguard or it is not a kind of a get or both. sent17: if there is something such that it malingers trifle then the dumdum is ambitious and is a kind of a telegrapher. sent18: if the poisoner is not a kind of a rearguard then the tiger does malinger trifle. sent19: the bouffant is not vocational if the techie is not an anna and/or does not undress Monardella. sent20: something that is not iliac but stomatous is vocational. sent21: there exists something such that that it does undress Monardella and is not an anna does not hold. sent22: the rival is a Typhoeus if it is not unexchangeable and not a Sabbatarian. sent23: the bouffant bops lepidopterist. sent24: the wagonwright is stomatous. sent25: the rival is exchangeable if the fact that the wagonwright is both not iliac and stomatous is not true. ; $proof$ = 
sent20 -> int1: the wagonwright is vocational if it is both not iliac and stomatous.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wagonwright is a kind of non-iliac thing that is stomatous.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the wagonwright is vocational.; sent21 & sent6 -> int3: that the wagonwright is not vocational hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the wagonwright is not iliac but it is stomatous is incorrect.; int5 & sent25 -> int6: the rival is not unexchangeable.; sent23 -> int7: there is something such that it bops lepidopterist.; int7 & sent4 -> int8: the rival is not a kind of a Sabbatarian.; int6 & int8 -> int9: the rival is not unexchangeable and not a Sabbatarian.; int9 & sent22 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__