the transcription does contort tomboy.
sent1: if something is resolute it is a kind of a positivist. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a variation then the pullover is a kind of resolute an embryo. sent3: the transcription fits scorpaenoid. sent4: that that something does not fit ghat and does bedizen knock-knee is incorrect if it is participial is right. sent5: if the fact that something does not fit ghat and does bedizen knock-knee is false it does not contort tomboy. sent6: if the machilid is a kind of avitaminotic thing that is solar then the need is not a variation. sent7: something does fire but it is not a positivist if it is not participial. sent8: the machilid is avitaminotic if it naturalizes. sent9: the transcription is not a lyricality. sent10: the machilid is an illegitimacy and it is solar if the scorpaenoid is not a Portuguese. sent11: if something that is a fire is not a positivist then it does contort tomboy. sent12: the half-and-half is not participial and it is not a faun. sent13: if there exists something such that it is a positivist then the postmodernism is a fire and/or is participial. sent14: something does roil and does not contort deafness if it is non-postbiblical. sent15: if the postmodernism does fire the transcription is participial. sent16: if the transcription fits ghat and does not bedizen melioration then that it is a kind of a Portuguese hold. sent17: if that something is a kind of a fire and it is a positivist is not false it does contort tomboy. sent18: something does not bedizen knock-knee. sent19: the scorpaenoid is a driftwood but it is not a kind of a Gulu. sent20: a participial thing that does not contort tomboy fits ghat. sent21: that the machilid does naturalize hold. sent22: the transcription does not fit ghat and is not participial if there exists something such that the fact that it does not bedizen knock-knee is not false. sent23: if the scorpaenoid is a driftwood and is not a Gulu it is not a Portuguese.
sent18 & sent22 -> int1: the transcription does not fit ghat and is not participial.; int1 -> int2: the transcription is non-participial.; sent7 -> int3: if the transcription is not participial it is a fire and it is not a positivist.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the transcription is a fire but not a positivist.; sent11 -> int5: if the transcription is a kind of a fire but it is not a positivist it contorts tomboy.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
the transcription does not contort tomboy.
sent5 -> int6: if that the transcription does not fit ghat but it bedizens knock-knee is not correct it does not contort tomboy.; sent4 -> int7: that the transcription does not fit ghat but it does bedizen knock-knee does not hold if it is participial.; sent1 -> int8: the pullover is a positivist if it is resolute.; sent8 & sent21 -> int9: the machilid is avitaminotic.; sent23 & sent19 -> int10: the scorpaenoid is not a Portuguese.; sent10 & int10 -> int11: the machilid is an illegitimacy and solar.; int11 -> int12: the machilid is solar.; int9 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the machilid is both not non-avitaminotic and solar is not incorrect.; sent6 & int13 -> int14: the need is not a kind of a variation.; int14 -> int15: there is something such that it is not a variation.; int15 & sent2 -> int16: the pullover is resolute and an embryo.; int16 -> int17: the pullover is resolute.; int8 & int17 -> int18: the pullover is a positivist.; int18 -> int19: something is a kind of a positivist.; int19 & sent13 -> int20: the postmodernism is a fire and/or is participial.;
$hypothesis$ = the transcription does contort tomboy. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is resolute it is a kind of a positivist. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a variation then the pullover is a kind of resolute an embryo. sent3: the transcription fits scorpaenoid. sent4: that that something does not fit ghat and does bedizen knock-knee is incorrect if it is participial is right. sent5: if the fact that something does not fit ghat and does bedizen knock-knee is false it does not contort tomboy. sent6: if the machilid is a kind of avitaminotic thing that is solar then the need is not a variation. sent7: something does fire but it is not a positivist if it is not participial. sent8: the machilid is avitaminotic if it naturalizes. sent9: the transcription is not a lyricality. sent10: the machilid is an illegitimacy and it is solar if the scorpaenoid is not a Portuguese. sent11: if something that is a fire is not a positivist then it does contort tomboy. sent12: the half-and-half is not participial and it is not a faun. sent13: if there exists something such that it is a positivist then the postmodernism is a fire and/or is participial. sent14: something does roil and does not contort deafness if it is non-postbiblical. sent15: if the postmodernism does fire the transcription is participial. sent16: if the transcription fits ghat and does not bedizen melioration then that it is a kind of a Portuguese hold. sent17: if that something is a kind of a fire and it is a positivist is not false it does contort tomboy. sent18: something does not bedizen knock-knee. sent19: the scorpaenoid is a driftwood but it is not a kind of a Gulu. sent20: a participial thing that does not contort tomboy fits ghat. sent21: that the machilid does naturalize hold. sent22: the transcription does not fit ghat and is not participial if there exists something such that the fact that it does not bedizen knock-knee is not false. sent23: if the scorpaenoid is a driftwood and is not a Gulu it is not a Portuguese. ; $proof$ = 
sent18 & sent22 -> int1: the transcription does not fit ghat and is not participial.; int1 -> int2: the transcription is non-participial.; sent7 -> int3: if the transcription is not participial it is a fire and it is not a positivist.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the transcription is a fire but not a positivist.; sent11 -> int5: if the transcription is a kind of a fire but it is not a positivist it contorts tomboy.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__