the sandpiper does not abound.
sent1: something is an amoxicillin and it does desecrate brother-in-law. sent2: if the tulip is a Confucian then the fact that the dowager is a Cyrus is not false. sent3: if that something is an amoxicillin or it desecrates brother-in-law or both is not right it does not abound. sent4: if the dowager is balsamic then the sandpiper abounds. sent5: if the widow is not balsamic the streamliner is balsamic and is not a Confucian. sent6: the streamliner is a Confucian. sent7: the brother-in-law is a hospice and is non-triangulate if the widow is not a kind of a hospice. sent8: if the dowager is triangulate and balsamic the streamliner is not perithelial. sent9: if something is limbic and it is perithelial then it is not a kind of a hospice. sent10: if the brother-in-law is a hospice that does not triangulate the streamliner is non-balsamic. sent11: if something is a Cyrus then the fact that it triangulates is not false. sent12: the dowager is balsamic and/or is a kind of a Cyrus if the streamliner is not balsamic. sent13: something that is a oca but not postmenopausal is not non-balsamic. sent14: the brother-in-law is a hospice. sent15: if the brother-in-law is a hospice but not Confucian the dowager is not a kind of a Cyrus. sent16: the brother-in-law is not triangulate if it is both a Cyrus and perithelial. sent17: the widow is a kind of a sanctuary and it desecrates brother-in-law. sent18: the dowager is a oca but it is not postmenopausal if the monad is not a chloramphenicol. sent19: the brasserie does not untune Dactylopterus. sent20: that the sandpiper is an amoxicillin or it desecrates brother-in-law or both is not true if the fact that the widow is not limbic is not incorrect. sent21: the widow is not non-perithelial but Confucian. sent22: if something is an amoxicillin and it does desecrate brother-in-law then the widow is limbic. sent23: there exists something such that it does desecrate brother-in-law. sent24: if the widow is not a kind of a hospice then the brother-in-law is a hospice. sent25: if the dowager is a Cyrus the sandpiper abounds. sent26: the widow is limbic and it does desecrate brother-in-law if the brother-in-law is not perithelial. sent27: that that the brasserie is a Rhynia or not the foul or both does not hold if the brasserie does not untune Dactylopterus hold. sent28: something is an amoxicillin. sent29: the widow is a kind of a Confucian.
sent1 & sent22 -> int1: the widow is limbic.; sent21 -> int2: the widow is perithelial.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the widow is limbic and not non-perithelial.; sent9 -> int4: the widow is not a hospice if it is not non-limbic and it is perithelial.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the widow is not a hospice.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the brother-in-law is a kind of a hospice that does not triangulate.; int6 & sent10 -> int7: the streamliner is not balsamic.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the dowager is balsamic and/or is a kind of a Cyrus.; int8 & sent4 & sent25 -> hypothesis;
the sandpiper does not abound.
sent3 -> int9: the sandpiper does not abound if that either it is an amoxicillin or it desecrates brother-in-law or both does not hold.; sent11 -> int10: if the dowager is a Cyrus then it triangulates.; sent27 & sent19 -> int11: the fact that the brasserie is a Rhynia or not foul or both does not hold.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that that it is a Rhynia and/or is not a foul is wrong.; sent13 -> int13: the dowager is balsamic if it is a kind of a oca and is not postmenopausal.;
$hypothesis$ = the sandpiper does not abound. ; $context$ = sent1: something is an amoxicillin and it does desecrate brother-in-law. sent2: if the tulip is a Confucian then the fact that the dowager is a Cyrus is not false. sent3: if that something is an amoxicillin or it desecrates brother-in-law or both is not right it does not abound. sent4: if the dowager is balsamic then the sandpiper abounds. sent5: if the widow is not balsamic the streamliner is balsamic and is not a Confucian. sent6: the streamliner is a Confucian. sent7: the brother-in-law is a hospice and is non-triangulate if the widow is not a kind of a hospice. sent8: if the dowager is triangulate and balsamic the streamliner is not perithelial. sent9: if something is limbic and it is perithelial then it is not a kind of a hospice. sent10: if the brother-in-law is a hospice that does not triangulate the streamliner is non-balsamic. sent11: if something is a Cyrus then the fact that it triangulates is not false. sent12: the dowager is balsamic and/or is a kind of a Cyrus if the streamliner is not balsamic. sent13: something that is a oca but not postmenopausal is not non-balsamic. sent14: the brother-in-law is a hospice. sent15: if the brother-in-law is a hospice but not Confucian the dowager is not a kind of a Cyrus. sent16: the brother-in-law is not triangulate if it is both a Cyrus and perithelial. sent17: the widow is a kind of a sanctuary and it desecrates brother-in-law. sent18: the dowager is a oca but it is not postmenopausal if the monad is not a chloramphenicol. sent19: the brasserie does not untune Dactylopterus. sent20: that the sandpiper is an amoxicillin or it desecrates brother-in-law or both is not true if the fact that the widow is not limbic is not incorrect. sent21: the widow is not non-perithelial but Confucian. sent22: if something is an amoxicillin and it does desecrate brother-in-law then the widow is limbic. sent23: there exists something such that it does desecrate brother-in-law. sent24: if the widow is not a kind of a hospice then the brother-in-law is a hospice. sent25: if the dowager is a Cyrus the sandpiper abounds. sent26: the widow is limbic and it does desecrate brother-in-law if the brother-in-law is not perithelial. sent27: that that the brasserie is a Rhynia or not the foul or both does not hold if the brasserie does not untune Dactylopterus hold. sent28: something is an amoxicillin. sent29: the widow is a kind of a Confucian. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent22 -> int1: the widow is limbic.; sent21 -> int2: the widow is perithelial.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the widow is limbic and not non-perithelial.; sent9 -> int4: the widow is not a hospice if it is not non-limbic and it is perithelial.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the widow is not a hospice.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the brother-in-law is a kind of a hospice that does not triangulate.; int6 & sent10 -> int7: the streamliner is not balsamic.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the dowager is balsamic and/or is a kind of a Cyrus.; int8 & sent4 & sent25 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__