the nitrile is azotic but it is not a kind of a canticle.
sent1: if something is sabbatical then that it is non-Burundi and non-merciless is right. sent2: if there is something such that either it does not hash inkwell or it is a tiepin or both the highroad is a kind of a sabbatical. sent3: the repletion is Burundi and/or it does not hash inkwell. sent4: if the repletion is a canticle and it is a Burundi then it hashes inkwell. sent5: the fact that the rag does not confederate circumference and does hash wop is not true. sent6: the catapult is azotic. sent7: if that the catapult is ugly is true the fact that the repletion is not a extraversion but it is a kind of a expansiveness is not correct. sent8: the polemics is not merciless if that it is not a hoot and does hash moneybag is wrong. sent9: something is ugly if it is a expansiveness. sent10: if a hoot hashes moneybag it is ugly. sent11: if there is something such that it is azotic the repletion is azotic and/or it is merciless. sent12: something is not a Burundi if it is not a expansiveness. sent13: either something does hash moneybag or it is not a kind of a extraversion or both. sent14: the seascape is not a expansiveness if the polemics is ugly and it is a extraversion. sent15: the rag does confederate circumference if the fact that it does not confederate circumference and hashes wop is wrong. sent16: if something that does not leer does not accord foretop it is ostentatious. sent17: if the seascape is a extraversion then the shaker is a kind of a canticle. sent18: a expansiveness is not a extraversion but ugly. sent19: the repletion is a extraversion. sent20: the fact that the nitrile is azotic but it is not a canticle is false if the seascape is a extraversion. sent21: the polemics is a kind of a extraversion. sent22: if the rag does confederate circumference that it is not a kind of a leering and it does not accord foretop hold. sent23: if the repletion is azotic then the nitrile is a Burundi. sent24: the moneybag does not hash inkwell or it is a tiepin or both if there is something such that it is ostentatious. sent25: something is ugly if it is not a kind of a hoot and hashes moneybag. sent26: if the fact that the polemics does accord foretop is not incorrect then it is not animatistic. sent27: that the seascape is a kind of a Burundi hold if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Burundi and/or it does not hash inkwell.
sent25 -> int1: the polemics is ugly if it is not a hoot and it hashes moneybag.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the polemics is not a hoot but it does hash moneybag.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the polemics is not non-ugly is true.; int2 & sent21 -> int3: the polemics is both not non-ugly and a extraversion.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the seascape is not a expansiveness.; sent12 -> int5: if the fact that the seascape is not a expansiveness is right then it is not Burundi.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the seascape is not Burundi.; sent3 -> int7: something is a Burundi and/or it does not hash inkwell.; int7 & sent27 -> int8: the seascape is Burundi.; int6 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the fact that the polemics does not hoot but it does hash moneybag is not right.; int10 & sent8 -> int11: the polemics is not merciless.;
that the nitrile is azotic thing that is not a kind of a canticle is false.
sent1 -> int12: the highroad is not a kind of a Burundi and it is not merciless if it is a sabbatical.; sent16 -> int13: if the rag is not a leering and does not accord foretop then it is ostentatious.; sent15 & sent5 -> int14: the rag does confederate circumference.; sent22 & int14 -> int15: the rag is not a leering and does not accord foretop.; int13 & int15 -> int16: the rag is ostentatious.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that it is ostentatious.; int17 & sent24 -> int18: the moneybag does not hash inkwell and/or it is a tiepin.; int18 -> int19: something does not hash inkwell and/or it is a tiepin.; int19 & sent2 -> int20: that the highroad is a kind of a sabbatical is true.; int12 & int20 -> int21: the highroad is not a Burundi and it is not merciless.; int21 -> int22: there exists something such that it is not a Burundi and not merciless.;
$hypothesis$ = the nitrile is azotic but it is not a kind of a canticle. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is sabbatical then that it is non-Burundi and non-merciless is right. sent2: if there is something such that either it does not hash inkwell or it is a tiepin or both the highroad is a kind of a sabbatical. sent3: the repletion is Burundi and/or it does not hash inkwell. sent4: if the repletion is a canticle and it is a Burundi then it hashes inkwell. sent5: the fact that the rag does not confederate circumference and does hash wop is not true. sent6: the catapult is azotic. sent7: if that the catapult is ugly is true the fact that the repletion is not a extraversion but it is a kind of a expansiveness is not correct. sent8: the polemics is not merciless if that it is not a hoot and does hash moneybag is wrong. sent9: something is ugly if it is a expansiveness. sent10: if a hoot hashes moneybag it is ugly. sent11: if there is something such that it is azotic the repletion is azotic and/or it is merciless. sent12: something is not a Burundi if it is not a expansiveness. sent13: either something does hash moneybag or it is not a kind of a extraversion or both. sent14: the seascape is not a expansiveness if the polemics is ugly and it is a extraversion. sent15: the rag does confederate circumference if the fact that it does not confederate circumference and hashes wop is wrong. sent16: if something that does not leer does not accord foretop it is ostentatious. sent17: if the seascape is a extraversion then the shaker is a kind of a canticle. sent18: a expansiveness is not a extraversion but ugly. sent19: the repletion is a extraversion. sent20: the fact that the nitrile is azotic but it is not a canticle is false if the seascape is a extraversion. sent21: the polemics is a kind of a extraversion. sent22: if the rag does confederate circumference that it is not a kind of a leering and it does not accord foretop hold. sent23: if the repletion is azotic then the nitrile is a Burundi. sent24: the moneybag does not hash inkwell or it is a tiepin or both if there is something such that it is ostentatious. sent25: something is ugly if it is not a kind of a hoot and hashes moneybag. sent26: if the fact that the polemics does accord foretop is not incorrect then it is not animatistic. sent27: that the seascape is a kind of a Burundi hold if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Burundi and/or it does not hash inkwell. ; $proof$ = 
sent25 -> int1: the polemics is ugly if it is not a hoot and it hashes moneybag.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the polemics is not a hoot but it does hash moneybag.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the polemics is not non-ugly is true.; int2 & sent21 -> int3: the polemics is both not non-ugly and a extraversion.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the seascape is not a expansiveness.; sent12 -> int5: if the fact that the seascape is not a expansiveness is right then it is not Burundi.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the seascape is not Burundi.; sent3 -> int7: something is a Burundi and/or it does not hash inkwell.; int7 & sent27 -> int8: the seascape is Burundi.; int6 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the fact that the polemics does not hoot but it does hash moneybag is not right.; int10 & sent8 -> int11: the polemics is not merciless.; __UNKNOWN__