the squamule is incommutable and it moves clearance.
sent1: if the fact that something does move diatomite and is not abaxial is right then it does not radiate. sent2: if something radiates and it is lexical the squamule is incommutable. sent3: the semifinalist does not aggregate unit. sent4: if something is not incommutable and/or is not lexical then it is not lexical. sent5: if the valise does not aggregate Micmac then the squamule is pectoral. sent6: the squamule is abaxial. sent7: the sarcophagus moves diatomite if it does crumble. sent8: the valise is not lexical if that it is not a kind of a Verlaine and it does not radiate is not true. sent9: if the squamule is abaxial it moves clearance. sent10: the semifinalist radiates if it is a pectoral. sent11: if there are non-lexical things the fact that the semifinalist is non-lexical and it does move clearance does not hold. sent12: the semifinalist radiates if it does move diatomite. sent13: either the semifinalist is a pectoral or it does move diatomite or both. sent14: the fact that the semifinalist does not aggregate unit is right if it is a kind of a Verlaine. sent15: if the semifinalist is a Verlaine then it does not aggregate unit and it is a neutral. sent16: if the silt is a Capella that the laundry does not aggregate Micmac and is not a kind of a jujutsu is wrong. sent17: the valise does not aggregate Micmac if the fact that the laundry does not aggregate Micmac and it is not a kind of a jujutsu is incorrect. sent18: if the squamule is not non-pectoral then the semifinalist does move diatomite but it is not abaxial. sent19: the eyecup is not incommutable or it is not lexical or both if the semifinalist does not radiate. sent20: that the semifinalist is a Verlaine is not wrong. sent21: if the semifinalist is a neutral then it is lexical. sent22: the fact that something is not a kind of a Verlaine and does not radiate is wrong if it is abaxial. sent23: the semifinalist does not move clearance if the fact that it is lexical and it move clearance is wrong.
sent15 & sent20 -> int1: the semifinalist does not aggregate unit and is not non-neutral.; int1 -> int2: the semifinalist is neutral.; int2 & sent21 -> int3: the semifinalist is lexical.; sent13 & sent10 & sent12 -> int4: that the semifinalist radiates is right.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the semifinalist does radiate and is lexical.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it radiates and is lexical.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the squamule is incommutable.; sent9 & sent6 -> int8: the squamule does move clearance.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis;
that the squamule is incommutable thing that does move clearance is incorrect.
sent22 -> int9: that the laundry is not a Verlaine and it does not radiate is not true if that it is abaxial is correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the squamule is incommutable and it moves clearance. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something does move diatomite and is not abaxial is right then it does not radiate. sent2: if something radiates and it is lexical the squamule is incommutable. sent3: the semifinalist does not aggregate unit. sent4: if something is not incommutable and/or is not lexical then it is not lexical. sent5: if the valise does not aggregate Micmac then the squamule is pectoral. sent6: the squamule is abaxial. sent7: the sarcophagus moves diatomite if it does crumble. sent8: the valise is not lexical if that it is not a kind of a Verlaine and it does not radiate is not true. sent9: if the squamule is abaxial it moves clearance. sent10: the semifinalist radiates if it is a pectoral. sent11: if there are non-lexical things the fact that the semifinalist is non-lexical and it does move clearance does not hold. sent12: the semifinalist radiates if it does move diatomite. sent13: either the semifinalist is a pectoral or it does move diatomite or both. sent14: the fact that the semifinalist does not aggregate unit is right if it is a kind of a Verlaine. sent15: if the semifinalist is a Verlaine then it does not aggregate unit and it is a neutral. sent16: if the silt is a Capella that the laundry does not aggregate Micmac and is not a kind of a jujutsu is wrong. sent17: the valise does not aggregate Micmac if the fact that the laundry does not aggregate Micmac and it is not a kind of a jujutsu is incorrect. sent18: if the squamule is not non-pectoral then the semifinalist does move diatomite but it is not abaxial. sent19: the eyecup is not incommutable or it is not lexical or both if the semifinalist does not radiate. sent20: that the semifinalist is a Verlaine is not wrong. sent21: if the semifinalist is a neutral then it is lexical. sent22: the fact that something is not a kind of a Verlaine and does not radiate is wrong if it is abaxial. sent23: the semifinalist does not move clearance if the fact that it is lexical and it move clearance is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 & sent20 -> int1: the semifinalist does not aggregate unit and is not non-neutral.; int1 -> int2: the semifinalist is neutral.; int2 & sent21 -> int3: the semifinalist is lexical.; sent13 & sent10 & sent12 -> int4: that the semifinalist radiates is right.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the semifinalist does radiate and is lexical.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it radiates and is lexical.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the squamule is incommutable.; sent9 & sent6 -> int8: the squamule does move clearance.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__