there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-aerological and it is a sugariness is not correct.
sent1: the monocle does not stickle navigation. sent2: the monocle is not a kind of a Calorie and is a kind of a self-help if it does not stickle navigation. sent3: the fact that if a coffeeberry is not a kind of a fluoridation it is not non-yogistic is not incorrect. sent4: The navigation does not stickle monocle. sent5: the Meany is not a guitar if the fact that the stirrer is a kind of a Marks but it is not mud-brick does not hold. sent6: if the stirrer is a echinoderm then the monocle avalanches. sent7: if a Marks is not mud-brick then it is a echinoderm. sent8: if something does avalanche it is a Calorie.
sent7 -> int1: if the stirrer is a Marks and is not mud-brick it is a echinoderm.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stirrer is a Marks but it is non-mud-brick.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the stirrer is a echinoderm.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the monocle avalanches.; sent8 -> int4: if the monocle avalanches then it is a Calorie.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the monocle is a Calorie.; sent2 & sent1 -> int6: the monocle is not a Calorie and is a self-help.; int6 -> int7: the monocle is not a Calorie.; int5 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: that that the stirrer is a Marks and non-mud-brick is not incorrect is incorrect.; int9 & sent5 -> int10: the Meany is not a kind of a guitar.;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-aerological and it is a sugariness is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the monocle does not stickle navigation. sent2: the monocle is not a kind of a Calorie and is a kind of a self-help if it does not stickle navigation. sent3: the fact that if a coffeeberry is not a kind of a fluoridation it is not non-yogistic is not incorrect. sent4: The navigation does not stickle monocle. sent5: the Meany is not a guitar if the fact that the stirrer is a kind of a Marks but it is not mud-brick does not hold. sent6: if the stirrer is a echinoderm then the monocle avalanches. sent7: if a Marks is not mud-brick then it is a echinoderm. sent8: if something does avalanche it is a Calorie. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: if the stirrer is a Marks and is not mud-brick it is a echinoderm.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stirrer is a Marks but it is non-mud-brick.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the stirrer is a echinoderm.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the monocle avalanches.; sent8 -> int4: if the monocle avalanches then it is a Calorie.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the monocle is a Calorie.; sent2 & sent1 -> int6: the monocle is not a Calorie and is a self-help.; int6 -> int7: the monocle is not a Calorie.; int5 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: that that the stirrer is a Marks and non-mud-brick is not incorrect is incorrect.; int9 & sent5 -> int10: the Meany is not a kind of a guitar.; __UNKNOWN__