the angledozer is vesical.
sent1: if something that is not a fricative is not a kind of a notochord the soffit does not girdle spoil. sent2: something is not hydrolyzable if it does not girdle spoil. sent3: the soffit is not vesical if the angledozer is a kind of a greenskeeper. sent4: if the microdot is not a greenskeeper then it is not a kind of a bud. sent5: that the angledozer is a kind of a mealberry is correct. sent6: the microdot is not a greenskeeper. sent7: the sty is an apprenticeship if the soffit is not a greenskeeper. sent8: the soffit is a mealberry but it is not a kind of a beneficiary if the sty is not chemiluminescent. sent9: the fact that the microdot is not cheliferous but it does steepen is wrong if it is a Cajanus. sent10: the fact that something is not a greenskeeper but an apprenticeship does not hold if it is not a beneficiary. sent11: the microdot is not hydrolyzable. sent12: the fact that the microdot is not a kind of a beneficiary is not wrong if the fact that the sty is not an apprenticeship is not right. sent13: the soffit does not girdle spoil if there is something such that it is a fricative and not a notochord. sent14: the angledozer is hydrolyzable. sent15: the microdot is a kind of a Cajanus. sent16: the fact that something is vesical and does not girdle spoil is wrong if it is hydrolyzable. sent17: the soffit does not girdle spoil if something is not a fricative but it is a notochord. sent18: if that the soffit is not a greenskeeper and is an apprenticeship does not hold then the fact that the angledozer is hydrolyzable is not incorrect. sent19: there is something such that it is not a fricative and it is not a notochord. sent20: something is not a kind of a greenskeeper if it is not hydrolyzable. sent21: the microdot does girdle spoil. sent22: the angledozer girdles spoil if the soffit is hydrolyzable. sent23: if the microdot is not a beneficiary the angledozer is a mealberry and it is vesical. sent24: the angledozer is a mealberry if the microdot is not beneficiary.
sent19 & sent1 -> int1: the soffit does not girdle spoil.; sent2 -> int2: if the soffit does not girdle spoil then it is not hydrolyzable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the soffit is not hydrolyzable.; sent20 -> int4: if the soffit is not hydrolyzable then that it is not a kind of a greenskeeper is correct.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the soffit is not a greenskeeper.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the sty is a kind of an apprenticeship.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the microdot is not a kind of a beneficiary.; int7 & sent23 -> int8: the angledozer is a mealberry and vesical.; int8 -> hypothesis;
the angledozer is not vesical.
$hypothesis$ = the angledozer is vesical. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is not a fricative is not a kind of a notochord the soffit does not girdle spoil. sent2: something is not hydrolyzable if it does not girdle spoil. sent3: the soffit is not vesical if the angledozer is a kind of a greenskeeper. sent4: if the microdot is not a greenskeeper then it is not a kind of a bud. sent5: that the angledozer is a kind of a mealberry is correct. sent6: the microdot is not a greenskeeper. sent7: the sty is an apprenticeship if the soffit is not a greenskeeper. sent8: the soffit is a mealberry but it is not a kind of a beneficiary if the sty is not chemiluminescent. sent9: the fact that the microdot is not cheliferous but it does steepen is wrong if it is a Cajanus. sent10: the fact that something is not a greenskeeper but an apprenticeship does not hold if it is not a beneficiary. sent11: the microdot is not hydrolyzable. sent12: the fact that the microdot is not a kind of a beneficiary is not wrong if the fact that the sty is not an apprenticeship is not right. sent13: the soffit does not girdle spoil if there is something such that it is a fricative and not a notochord. sent14: the angledozer is hydrolyzable. sent15: the microdot is a kind of a Cajanus. sent16: the fact that something is vesical and does not girdle spoil is wrong if it is hydrolyzable. sent17: the soffit does not girdle spoil if something is not a fricative but it is a notochord. sent18: if that the soffit is not a greenskeeper and is an apprenticeship does not hold then the fact that the angledozer is hydrolyzable is not incorrect. sent19: there is something such that it is not a fricative and it is not a notochord. sent20: something is not a kind of a greenskeeper if it is not hydrolyzable. sent21: the microdot does girdle spoil. sent22: the angledozer girdles spoil if the soffit is hydrolyzable. sent23: if the microdot is not a beneficiary the angledozer is a mealberry and it is vesical. sent24: the angledozer is a mealberry if the microdot is not beneficiary. ; $proof$ = 
sent19 & sent1 -> int1: the soffit does not girdle spoil.; sent2 -> int2: if the soffit does not girdle spoil then it is not hydrolyzable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the soffit is not hydrolyzable.; sent20 -> int4: if the soffit is not hydrolyzable then that it is not a kind of a greenskeeper is correct.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the soffit is not a greenskeeper.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the sty is a kind of an apprenticeship.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the microdot is not a kind of a beneficiary.; int7 & sent23 -> int8: the angledozer is a mealberry and vesical.; int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__