the ecrevisse is not a bowline.
sent1: the Thessalian does not hash complicity and is a fundamentalist. sent2: something hashes complicity if it is a impudence. sent3: the ecrevisse is not a bowline if it is a kind of non-antigenic thing that does hash complicity. sent4: if the Thessalian is a kind of non-antigenic thing that does not hash complicity it is not a kind of a vertebrate. sent5: that the ecrevisse is a condenser hold. sent6: if the Thessalian is drinkable the ecrevisse is not a bowline but it is a kind of a impudence. sent7: that if the Thessalian is a impudence the ecrevisse is not a vertebrate but it is antigenic is correct. sent8: the ecrevisse is not a acatalectic and it does not oppose dock. sent9: the ecrevisse is not beneficent. sent10: if the ecrevisse is vertebrate then the Thessalian is not a bowline but it is drinkable. sent11: the fact that the ecrevisse is drinkable is correct. sent12: the flybridge is a vertebrate. sent13: the ecrevisse is not a kind of a vertebrate if it is not a kind of a impudence and it is drinkable. sent14: if the fact that something is not antigenic and it does not hash complicity is not correct then it is drinkable. sent15: that the ecrevisse is both invertebrate and not a bowline is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Thessalian is not antigenic and it does not hash complicity.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the Thessalian is not a kind of a vertebrate.; sent14 -> int2: if that the Thessalian is not antigenic and does not hash complicity is not correct then it is drinkable.;
$hypothesis$ = the ecrevisse is not a bowline. ; $context$ = sent1: the Thessalian does not hash complicity and is a fundamentalist. sent2: something hashes complicity if it is a impudence. sent3: the ecrevisse is not a bowline if it is a kind of non-antigenic thing that does hash complicity. sent4: if the Thessalian is a kind of non-antigenic thing that does not hash complicity it is not a kind of a vertebrate. sent5: that the ecrevisse is a condenser hold. sent6: if the Thessalian is drinkable the ecrevisse is not a bowline but it is a kind of a impudence. sent7: that if the Thessalian is a impudence the ecrevisse is not a vertebrate but it is antigenic is correct. sent8: the ecrevisse is not a acatalectic and it does not oppose dock. sent9: the ecrevisse is not beneficent. sent10: if the ecrevisse is vertebrate then the Thessalian is not a bowline but it is drinkable. sent11: the fact that the ecrevisse is drinkable is correct. sent12: the flybridge is a vertebrate. sent13: the ecrevisse is not a kind of a vertebrate if it is not a kind of a impudence and it is drinkable. sent14: if the fact that something is not antigenic and it does not hash complicity is not correct then it is drinkable. sent15: that the ecrevisse is both invertebrate and not a bowline is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Thessalian is not antigenic and it does not hash complicity.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the Thessalian is not a kind of a vertebrate.; sent14 -> int2: if that the Thessalian is not antigenic and does not hash complicity is not correct then it is drinkable.; __UNKNOWN__