the fact that there is something such that if that it is not bimetallistic is not wrong then it is a kind of a swamp or does not fix Phyllium or both is not correct.
sent1: if something is not a photometry then that it is a swamp or it does not fix Phyllium or both is right. sent2: the storminess does fix Phyllium and is bimetallistic if there is something such that it swamps. sent3: something is bimetallistic if it is unstable. sent4: if the fact that something is not a swamp and it does not lace Cakile is wrong then it does swamp. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Hydnaceae then it is extracellular and/or it is excretory. sent6: the fact that the vacuum is not a kind of a swamp and does not lace Cakile does not hold if it is not a scorer. sent7: if the brochette is a Popillia then that it is a photometry or it is not a solipsism or both is correct. sent8: if the storminess is bimetallistic that the surfer is a kind of stable thing that is a photometry hold. sent9: the four-in-hand does fix pemphigus. sent10: the fact that the caudex is a kind of the swamp or it does fix Phyllium or both if the fact that the caudex is not a photometry is right is not false. sent11: if the fact that the caudex is a photometry hold then it is unstable. sent12: either something is a Plantagenet or it fixes Tachypleus or both if it does not article baas. sent13: the caudex does bring.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the caudex is a photometry.; sent11 & assump2 -> int1: the caudex is unstable.; sent3 -> int2: if the caudex is unstable it is bimetallistic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the caudex is bimetallistic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the caudex is non-bimetallistic.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the caudex is not a photometry.; sent1 -> int6: the caudex is a swamp or it does not fix Phyllium or both if it is not a photometry.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the caudex swamps and/or does not fix Phyllium.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: if the caudex is not bimetallistic either it is a kind of a swamp or it does not fix Phyllium or both.; int8 -> hypothesis;
the caudex is yeasty.
sent4 -> int9: that if that the vacuum is not the swamp and it does not lace Cakile is not true the vacuum does swamp is true.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it is not bimetallistic is not wrong then it is a kind of a swamp or does not fix Phyllium or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a photometry then that it is a swamp or it does not fix Phyllium or both is right. sent2: the storminess does fix Phyllium and is bimetallistic if there is something such that it swamps. sent3: something is bimetallistic if it is unstable. sent4: if the fact that something is not a swamp and it does not lace Cakile is wrong then it does swamp. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Hydnaceae then it is extracellular and/or it is excretory. sent6: the fact that the vacuum is not a kind of a swamp and does not lace Cakile does not hold if it is not a scorer. sent7: if the brochette is a Popillia then that it is a photometry or it is not a solipsism or both is correct. sent8: if the storminess is bimetallistic that the surfer is a kind of stable thing that is a photometry hold. sent9: the four-in-hand does fix pemphigus. sent10: the fact that the caudex is a kind of the swamp or it does fix Phyllium or both if the fact that the caudex is not a photometry is right is not false. sent11: if the fact that the caudex is a photometry hold then it is unstable. sent12: either something is a Plantagenet or it fixes Tachypleus or both if it does not article baas. sent13: the caudex does bring. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the caudex is a photometry.; sent11 & assump2 -> int1: the caudex is unstable.; sent3 -> int2: if the caudex is unstable it is bimetallistic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the caudex is bimetallistic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the caudex is non-bimetallistic.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the caudex is not a photometry.; sent1 -> int6: the caudex is a swamp or it does not fix Phyllium or both if it is not a photometry.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the caudex swamps and/or does not fix Phyllium.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: if the caudex is not bimetallistic either it is a kind of a swamp or it does not fix Phyllium or both.; int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__