the efflorescence is not a quiver.
sent1: something is testaceous if it solemnizes allergology. sent2: the terrier is not aciculate. sent3: the CFO does not solemnize naphazoline if the fact that the LGB does not solemnize naphazoline but it is a kind of a gulf is not true. sent4: if something is not erecting then that it is a Porto and it does not flump is not correct. sent5: the fact that if the authorizer does haze Marxism the fact that the liza does not solemnize authorizer and it is not a kind of a overprint does not hold hold. sent6: the efflorescence does quiver if the fact that the authorizer is a Porto but it does not flump is not true. sent7: if the fact that something is not aciculate is not wrong then it is not a packed and it is non-endocentric. sent8: if something does not overprint the fact that it does haze Marxism and is not erecting is not right. sent9: the fact that the authorizer is not eastern and swashes is not correct. sent10: if the terrier is not a packed and not endocentric then it does solemnize allergology. sent11: if the efflorescence does not quiver then the fact that the fact that it hazes Marxism and is not eastern is true does not hold. sent12: if something is not a kind of a swash the fact that it is not erecting and it is not eastern is false. sent13: something is not erecting if the fact that it is both not eastern and not a swash is not correct. sent14: the settlor is not a swash if the fact that something does not flump and is a Porto hold. sent15: that the liza does not charm but it is a overprint is not correct. sent16: the fact that something is not eastern and it is not a swash is incorrect if it is not a fetometry. sent17: the liza solemnizes authorizer and it does overprint. sent18: either the efflorescence is a quiver or it solemnizes authorizer or both. sent19: if that the CFO does solemnize naphazoline is wrong it does not flump and is a Porto. sent20: if that the terrier is testaceous hold that the LGB does not solemnize naphazoline but it is a kind of a gulf does not hold. sent21: the authorizer does haze Marxism and is not a kind of a fetometry if the twinflower is eastern. sent22: the efflorescence is not a kind of a Porto. sent23: if the liza solemnizes authorizer or it does haze Marxism or both then the authorizer is not a fetometry.
sent17 -> int1: the liza solemnizes authorizer.; int1 -> int2: the liza solemnizes authorizer and/or does haze Marxism.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the authorizer is not a fetometry.; sent16 -> int4: if that the authorizer is not a fetometry is not wrong then the fact that it is non-eastern thing that is not a swash is not true.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the authorizer is both not eastern and not a swash is incorrect.; sent13 -> int6: if that the authorizer is both not eastern and not a swash is incorrect it is non-erecting.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the authorizer is not erecting.; sent4 -> int8: the fact that the fact that the authorizer is a Porto but it does not flump hold does not hold if it is not erecting.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the fact that the authorizer is a Porto but it does not flump does not hold is not wrong.; int9 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the efflorescence is not a quiver.
sent12 -> int10: if the settlor is not a swash then that it is both non-erecting and not eastern does not hold.; sent1 -> int11: if the terrier solemnizes allergology then it is testaceous.; sent7 -> int12: the fact that the terrier is both not a packed and not endocentric is not incorrect if it is not aciculate.; int12 & sent2 -> int13: the terrier is not a packed and it is not endocentric.; sent10 & int13 -> int14: the terrier does solemnize allergology.; int11 & int14 -> int15: the terrier is testaceous.; sent20 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the LGB does not solemnize naphazoline and is a gulf is incorrect.; sent3 & int16 -> int17: the CFO does not solemnize naphazoline.; sent19 & int17 -> int18: the CFO does not flump but it is a Porto.; int18 -> int19: something does not flump and is a Porto.; int19 & sent14 -> int20: the settlor is not a kind of a swash.; int10 & int20 -> int21: that the settlor is not erecting and not eastern is not true.; int21 -> int22: there is something such that the fact that it is non-erecting thing that is not eastern is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the efflorescence is not a quiver. ; $context$ = sent1: something is testaceous if it solemnizes allergology. sent2: the terrier is not aciculate. sent3: the CFO does not solemnize naphazoline if the fact that the LGB does not solemnize naphazoline but it is a kind of a gulf is not true. sent4: if something is not erecting then that it is a Porto and it does not flump is not correct. sent5: the fact that if the authorizer does haze Marxism the fact that the liza does not solemnize authorizer and it is not a kind of a overprint does not hold hold. sent6: the efflorescence does quiver if the fact that the authorizer is a Porto but it does not flump is not true. sent7: if the fact that something is not aciculate is not wrong then it is not a packed and it is non-endocentric. sent8: if something does not overprint the fact that it does haze Marxism and is not erecting is not right. sent9: the fact that the authorizer is not eastern and swashes is not correct. sent10: if the terrier is not a packed and not endocentric then it does solemnize allergology. sent11: if the efflorescence does not quiver then the fact that the fact that it hazes Marxism and is not eastern is true does not hold. sent12: if something is not a kind of a swash the fact that it is not erecting and it is not eastern is false. sent13: something is not erecting if the fact that it is both not eastern and not a swash is not correct. sent14: the settlor is not a swash if the fact that something does not flump and is a Porto hold. sent15: that the liza does not charm but it is a overprint is not correct. sent16: the fact that something is not eastern and it is not a swash is incorrect if it is not a fetometry. sent17: the liza solemnizes authorizer and it does overprint. sent18: either the efflorescence is a quiver or it solemnizes authorizer or both. sent19: if that the CFO does solemnize naphazoline is wrong it does not flump and is a Porto. sent20: if that the terrier is testaceous hold that the LGB does not solemnize naphazoline but it is a kind of a gulf does not hold. sent21: the authorizer does haze Marxism and is not a kind of a fetometry if the twinflower is eastern. sent22: the efflorescence is not a kind of a Porto. sent23: if the liza solemnizes authorizer or it does haze Marxism or both then the authorizer is not a fetometry. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 -> int1: the liza solemnizes authorizer.; int1 -> int2: the liza solemnizes authorizer and/or does haze Marxism.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the authorizer is not a fetometry.; sent16 -> int4: if that the authorizer is not a fetometry is not wrong then the fact that it is non-eastern thing that is not a swash is not true.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the authorizer is both not eastern and not a swash is incorrect.; sent13 -> int6: if that the authorizer is both not eastern and not a swash is incorrect it is non-erecting.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the authorizer is not erecting.; sent4 -> int8: the fact that the fact that the authorizer is a Porto but it does not flump hold does not hold if it is not erecting.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the fact that the authorizer is a Porto but it does not flump does not hold is not wrong.; int9 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__