the distaff does not excel Hohenlinden.
sent1: the aviary is nonextant. sent2: if the fact that something is not non-tasteful and excels Balboa is not correct then it does not excel twilight. sent3: something does not excel Hohenlinden if it does not excel ludo. sent4: if the fact that the heelbone does not excel Balboa is not incorrect the aviary does excel twilight and is a filmdom. sent5: that the waterskin is both ballistic and not a downrightness is not true. sent6: the aviary is unfavorable thing that is comic if it is nonextant. sent7: something is not a kind of a fishplate if the fact that it is a kind of lathery a Malian is wrong. sent8: if the fact that something is a filmdom or it does excel Hohenlinden or both does not hold it does not excel ludo. sent9: the distaff does not excel Hohenlinden if it does not excel ludo. sent10: if the waterskin does not excel ludo that the distaff excel ludo and it is a kind of a filmdom is false. sent11: that the Egyptian either is a kind of a filmdom or excels Hohenlinden or both is not correct if the waterskin does not excel twilight. sent12: if that something coheres nepotism but it is not tasteful does not hold it does not excel Balboa. sent13: the waterskin does not excel ludo if it is a downrightness. sent14: something is a kind of a tinker that coheres nepotism if it is not a sustainability. sent15: if the aviary is not favorable and is comic it is not a kind of a sustainability. sent16: if the fact that the waterskin is ballistic but not a downrightness does not hold then it does not excel ludo. sent17: if the aviary does cohere nepotism then the distaff is not tasteful. sent18: something does not excel Hohenlinden if that it excels ludo and is a filmdom is false. sent19: that the waterskin is both not non-ballistic and a downrightness is false. sent20: the distaff is not ballistic.
sent16 & sent5 -> int1: the waterskin does not excel ludo.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: that the distaff excels ludo and is a filmdom is not true.; sent18 -> int3: the distaff does not excel Hohenlinden if the fact that it does excel ludo and it is a filmdom is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;
the distaff excels Hohenlinden.
sent12 -> int4: if that the heelbone coheres nepotism but it is not tasteful is wrong then it does not excel Balboa.;
$hypothesis$ = the distaff does not excel Hohenlinden. ; $context$ = sent1: the aviary is nonextant. sent2: if the fact that something is not non-tasteful and excels Balboa is not correct then it does not excel twilight. sent3: something does not excel Hohenlinden if it does not excel ludo. sent4: if the fact that the heelbone does not excel Balboa is not incorrect the aviary does excel twilight and is a filmdom. sent5: that the waterskin is both ballistic and not a downrightness is not true. sent6: the aviary is unfavorable thing that is comic if it is nonextant. sent7: something is not a kind of a fishplate if the fact that it is a kind of lathery a Malian is wrong. sent8: if the fact that something is a filmdom or it does excel Hohenlinden or both does not hold it does not excel ludo. sent9: the distaff does not excel Hohenlinden if it does not excel ludo. sent10: if the waterskin does not excel ludo that the distaff excel ludo and it is a kind of a filmdom is false. sent11: that the Egyptian either is a kind of a filmdom or excels Hohenlinden or both is not correct if the waterskin does not excel twilight. sent12: if that something coheres nepotism but it is not tasteful does not hold it does not excel Balboa. sent13: the waterskin does not excel ludo if it is a downrightness. sent14: something is a kind of a tinker that coheres nepotism if it is not a sustainability. sent15: if the aviary is not favorable and is comic it is not a kind of a sustainability. sent16: if the fact that the waterskin is ballistic but not a downrightness does not hold then it does not excel ludo. sent17: if the aviary does cohere nepotism then the distaff is not tasteful. sent18: something does not excel Hohenlinden if that it excels ludo and is a filmdom is false. sent19: that the waterskin is both not non-ballistic and a downrightness is false. sent20: the distaff is not ballistic. ; $proof$ = 
sent16 & sent5 -> int1: the waterskin does not excel ludo.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: that the distaff excels ludo and is a filmdom is not true.; sent18 -> int3: the distaff does not excel Hohenlinden if the fact that it does excel ludo and it is a filmdom is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__