the fact that there is something such that it does not suspend defilade does not hold.
sent1: there is something such that it is expansionist. sent2: if the fact that the eider does clue Menispermum and is not expansionist is wrong then the flatbed is dermatologic. sent3: if the belfry does clue Menispermum and it is a kind of a saucepan the fact that the eider does not suspend selectivity is true. sent4: the fact that the belfry does clue instructress but it is not a pederast does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that it is a Schrodinger and it is a space. sent6: that if the belfry suspends selectivity the fact that the fact that the belfry does not clue instructress and is a pederast does not hold is correct is right. sent7: there is something such that it is a Schrodinger. sent8: the fact that something does not clue instructress and it is not a pederast does not hold if it suspends selectivity. sent9: there exists something such that it does clue Menispermum. sent10: the fact that the belfry does not clue instructress and is a kind of a pederast does not hold. sent11: if something suspends selectivity then that it does clue instructress and it is not a kind of a pederast is not right. sent12: the belfry is not a saucepan if the flatbed is dermatologic and it does suspend defilade. sent13: if something is a Schrodinger and it is a space the belfry suspends selectivity. sent14: if that the flatbed is not dermatologic is right that the fact that the eider suspends defilade and it is expansionist is not correct hold. sent15: something does suspend defilade. sent16: there exists something such that it is a kind of a space. sent17: if the belfry does suspend selectivity that it clues instructress and it is not a pederast is not correct. sent18: the flatbed is dermatologic if the eider is expansionist. sent19: something does not clue instructress and it is not a pederast if the fact that it is not a saucepan hold. sent20: the fact that the belfry suspends selectivity is not wrong if the fact that the flatbed does suspend defilade but it does not clue instructress is not correct. sent21: that the eider does clue Menispermum but it is not expansionist does not hold. sent22: the fact that the eider is harmless and suspends challenge is incorrect. sent23: the fact that something does not clue instructress and is a pederast does not hold if the fact that it does suspend selectivity is right. sent24: the eider clues instructress if the belfry does clue Menispermum. sent25: that the eider clues Menispermum and is expansionist is wrong.
sent2 & sent21 -> int1: the flatbed is dermatologic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the flatbed suspends defilade.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the flatbed is dermatologic and it suspends defilade.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the belfry is not a saucepan.; sent19 -> int4: the belfry does not clue instructress and is not a pederast if it is not a saucepan.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the belfry does not clue instructress and is not a pederast.; sent8 -> int6: the fact that the belfry does not clue instructress and is not a pederast does not hold if the fact that it suspends selectivity hold.; sent5 & sent13 -> int7: the belfry suspends selectivity.; int6 & int7 -> int8: that the belfry does not clue instructress and it is not a kind of a pederast is not right.; int5 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the fact that the flatbed does not suspend defilade is correct.; int10 -> hypothesis;
the personal is not expansionist.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that it does not suspend defilade does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is expansionist. sent2: if the fact that the eider does clue Menispermum and is not expansionist is wrong then the flatbed is dermatologic. sent3: if the belfry does clue Menispermum and it is a kind of a saucepan the fact that the eider does not suspend selectivity is true. sent4: the fact that the belfry does clue instructress but it is not a pederast does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that it is a Schrodinger and it is a space. sent6: that if the belfry suspends selectivity the fact that the fact that the belfry does not clue instructress and is a pederast does not hold is correct is right. sent7: there is something such that it is a Schrodinger. sent8: the fact that something does not clue instructress and it is not a pederast does not hold if it suspends selectivity. sent9: there exists something such that it does clue Menispermum. sent10: the fact that the belfry does not clue instructress and is a kind of a pederast does not hold. sent11: if something suspends selectivity then that it does clue instructress and it is not a kind of a pederast is not right. sent12: the belfry is not a saucepan if the flatbed is dermatologic and it does suspend defilade. sent13: if something is a Schrodinger and it is a space the belfry suspends selectivity. sent14: if that the flatbed is not dermatologic is right that the fact that the eider suspends defilade and it is expansionist is not correct hold. sent15: something does suspend defilade. sent16: there exists something such that it is a kind of a space. sent17: if the belfry does suspend selectivity that it clues instructress and it is not a pederast is not correct. sent18: the flatbed is dermatologic if the eider is expansionist. sent19: something does not clue instructress and it is not a pederast if the fact that it is not a saucepan hold. sent20: the fact that the belfry suspends selectivity is not wrong if the fact that the flatbed does suspend defilade but it does not clue instructress is not correct. sent21: that the eider does clue Menispermum but it is not expansionist does not hold. sent22: the fact that the eider is harmless and suspends challenge is incorrect. sent23: the fact that something does not clue instructress and is a pederast does not hold if the fact that it does suspend selectivity is right. sent24: the eider clues instructress if the belfry does clue Menispermum. sent25: that the eider clues Menispermum and is expansionist is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent21 -> int1: the flatbed is dermatologic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the flatbed suspends defilade.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the flatbed is dermatologic and it suspends defilade.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the belfry is not a saucepan.; sent19 -> int4: the belfry does not clue instructress and is not a pederast if it is not a saucepan.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the belfry does not clue instructress and is not a pederast.; sent8 -> int6: the fact that the belfry does not clue instructress and is not a pederast does not hold if the fact that it suspends selectivity hold.; sent5 & sent13 -> int7: the belfry suspends selectivity.; int6 & int7 -> int8: that the belfry does not clue instructress and it is not a kind of a pederast is not right.; int5 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the fact that the flatbed does not suspend defilade is correct.; int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__