the lapidary barbarizes Seminole but it is not indusial.
sent1: the finger is a bargain. sent2: that the lapidary does overturn Carpobrotus but it is not a plesiosaur is not correct if the finger does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent3: the finger is not a kind of a bargain if that the catfish is a bargain and not inner is not true. sent4: the lapidary is not indusial if the finger laicizes or it does not overturn Carpobrotus or both. sent5: if the fact that something is a plesiosaur but it is not a paramour does not hold it does barbarize Seminole. sent6: that something does bargain but it is not inner is wrong if it does not overturn extraordinariness. sent7: the lapidary is a plesiosaur but it is not noncollapsible. sent8: the rifleman does laicize if the azathioprine is noncollapsible. sent9: the derv is not noncollapsible. sent10: if the finger does bargain it laicizes and/or it does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent11: if something that is not a kind of a thump is a vacuole that it is not a kind of a plesiosaur is right. sent12: the azathioprine is not a thump and is a vacuole if the rifleman is not noncollapsible. sent13: if there is something such that it does laicize and it does not bargain then the azathioprine does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent14: the fact that something is a kind of a plesiosaur or it is a paramour or both does not hold if it does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent15: if the rifleman is noncollapsible the fact that the lapidary barbarizes Seminole but it is non-indusial does not hold. sent16: the fact that the lapidary is a kind of a plesiosaur but it is not a paramour does not hold if the azathioprine is not a plesiosaur. sent17: the finger laicizes if something does not barbarize wordbook and is not a kind of a muffled. sent18: the rifleman is not noncollapsible.
sent12 & sent18 -> int1: the azathioprine is not a kind of a thump but it is a vacuole.; sent11 -> int2: if the azathioprine is not a thump but a vacuole then it is not a plesiosaur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the azathioprine is not a plesiosaur.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: that the lapidary is a plesiosaur but it is not a kind of a paramour is false.; sent5 -> int5: if that the lapidary is a plesiosaur and is not a paramour is not true then it barbarizes Seminole.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the lapidary does barbarize Seminole.; sent10 & sent1 -> int7: the finger laicizes or it does not overturn Carpobrotus or both.; sent4 & int7 -> int8: the lapidary is not indusial.; int6 & int8 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the lapidary barbarizes Seminole and is not indusial does not hold.
sent14 -> int9: if the azathioprine does not overturn Carpobrotus then that either it is a plesiosaur or it is a kind of a paramour or both is incorrect.; sent6 -> int10: if the MP does not overturn extraordinariness then that it is a bargain and not inner is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the lapidary barbarizes Seminole but it is not indusial. ; $context$ = sent1: the finger is a bargain. sent2: that the lapidary does overturn Carpobrotus but it is not a plesiosaur is not correct if the finger does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent3: the finger is not a kind of a bargain if that the catfish is a bargain and not inner is not true. sent4: the lapidary is not indusial if the finger laicizes or it does not overturn Carpobrotus or both. sent5: if the fact that something is a plesiosaur but it is not a paramour does not hold it does barbarize Seminole. sent6: that something does bargain but it is not inner is wrong if it does not overturn extraordinariness. sent7: the lapidary is a plesiosaur but it is not noncollapsible. sent8: the rifleman does laicize if the azathioprine is noncollapsible. sent9: the derv is not noncollapsible. sent10: if the finger does bargain it laicizes and/or it does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent11: if something that is not a kind of a thump is a vacuole that it is not a kind of a plesiosaur is right. sent12: the azathioprine is not a thump and is a vacuole if the rifleman is not noncollapsible. sent13: if there is something such that it does laicize and it does not bargain then the azathioprine does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent14: the fact that something is a kind of a plesiosaur or it is a paramour or both does not hold if it does not overturn Carpobrotus. sent15: if the rifleman is noncollapsible the fact that the lapidary barbarizes Seminole but it is non-indusial does not hold. sent16: the fact that the lapidary is a kind of a plesiosaur but it is not a paramour does not hold if the azathioprine is not a plesiosaur. sent17: the finger laicizes if something does not barbarize wordbook and is not a kind of a muffled. sent18: the rifleman is not noncollapsible. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent18 -> int1: the azathioprine is not a kind of a thump but it is a vacuole.; sent11 -> int2: if the azathioprine is not a thump but a vacuole then it is not a plesiosaur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the azathioprine is not a plesiosaur.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: that the lapidary is a plesiosaur but it is not a kind of a paramour is false.; sent5 -> int5: if that the lapidary is a plesiosaur and is not a paramour is not true then it barbarizes Seminole.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the lapidary does barbarize Seminole.; sent10 & sent1 -> int7: the finger laicizes or it does not overturn Carpobrotus or both.; sent4 & int7 -> int8: the lapidary is not indusial.; int6 & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__