that the headlight is urethral but it is not an aspirate is not correct.
sent1: something does traipse and is not criminological. sent2: the quiche is not cryptanalytic. sent3: if that that the nephoscope is urethral is not false is not correct then the fact that the headlight is urethral and does not aspirate is false. sent4: the chela is not cryptanalytic if either it is not a kind of a Pompeii or it is not mesial or both. sent5: the essonite is not a Sebastopol and is cryptanalytic if there is something such that it is not mesial. sent6: the headlight is urethral but it is not a kind of an aspirate if the frog is not a religiosity. sent7: the hakim is not a Sebastopol and does not traipse if the chela is not cryptanalytic. sent8: the essonite is urethral if it is not a bathtub and is innumerate. sent9: the fact that the hakim is rigid and is not a Kakemono is incorrect. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that it does traipse and is not criminological is wrong then the nephoscope is not urethral. sent11: something is not mesial. sent12: if the hakim is not rigid the fact that the chela traipses and is not criminological is false. sent13: the cunt does not push Vitharr if that the essonite is not criminological and push Vitharr is false. sent14: if the cunt is not criminological the chela is celebratory. sent15: if the essonite does push Vitharr and is innumerate then the hakim is nonrigid. sent16: if something does not push Vitharr that the fact that it is not innumerate and it is celebratory is not wrong does not hold. sent17: if the frog is a kind of a bathtub and it is a kind of a Kakemono the cunt is not celebratory. sent18: the chela is cryptanalytic. sent19: the frog does push Vitharr but it is not celebratory if that the cunt is rigid is correct. sent20: if there exists something such that it is not a Sebastopol and does not traipse the essonite is rigid. sent21: if something is rigid then the fact that it is not criminological and pushes Vitharr does not hold. sent22: if the frog does push Vitharr and is not celebratory then the magnum is Coleridgian. sent23: if something is both not a Sebastopol and cryptanalytic then it does push Vitharr. sent24: the frog does not contemplate transfusion. sent25: if the cunt is not celebratory then the essonite is innumerate and is a religiosity. sent26: if something is not celebratory then it is not a religiosity.
sent23 -> int1: if the essonite is not a kind of a Sebastopol but it is cryptanalytic it pushes Vitharr.; sent11 & sent5 -> int2: the essonite is not a Sebastopol but it is cryptanalytic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the essonite does push Vitharr.;
the magnum is both Coleridgian and cryptanalytic.
$hypothesis$ = that the headlight is urethral but it is not an aspirate is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: something does traipse and is not criminological. sent2: the quiche is not cryptanalytic. sent3: if that that the nephoscope is urethral is not false is not correct then the fact that the headlight is urethral and does not aspirate is false. sent4: the chela is not cryptanalytic if either it is not a kind of a Pompeii or it is not mesial or both. sent5: the essonite is not a Sebastopol and is cryptanalytic if there is something such that it is not mesial. sent6: the headlight is urethral but it is not a kind of an aspirate if the frog is not a religiosity. sent7: the hakim is not a Sebastopol and does not traipse if the chela is not cryptanalytic. sent8: the essonite is urethral if it is not a bathtub and is innumerate. sent9: the fact that the hakim is rigid and is not a Kakemono is incorrect. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that it does traipse and is not criminological is wrong then the nephoscope is not urethral. sent11: something is not mesial. sent12: if the hakim is not rigid the fact that the chela traipses and is not criminological is false. sent13: the cunt does not push Vitharr if that the essonite is not criminological and push Vitharr is false. sent14: if the cunt is not criminological the chela is celebratory. sent15: if the essonite does push Vitharr and is innumerate then the hakim is nonrigid. sent16: if something does not push Vitharr that the fact that it is not innumerate and it is celebratory is not wrong does not hold. sent17: if the frog is a kind of a bathtub and it is a kind of a Kakemono the cunt is not celebratory. sent18: the chela is cryptanalytic. sent19: the frog does push Vitharr but it is not celebratory if that the cunt is rigid is correct. sent20: if there exists something such that it is not a Sebastopol and does not traipse the essonite is rigid. sent21: if something is rigid then the fact that it is not criminological and pushes Vitharr does not hold. sent22: if the frog does push Vitharr and is not celebratory then the magnum is Coleridgian. sent23: if something is both not a Sebastopol and cryptanalytic then it does push Vitharr. sent24: the frog does not contemplate transfusion. sent25: if the cunt is not celebratory then the essonite is innumerate and is a religiosity. sent26: if something is not celebratory then it is not a religiosity. ; $proof$ = 
sent23 -> int1: if the essonite is not a kind of a Sebastopol but it is cryptanalytic it pushes Vitharr.; sent11 & sent5 -> int2: the essonite is not a Sebastopol but it is cryptanalytic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the essonite does push Vitharr.; __UNKNOWN__