the snood is not a acanthoma.
sent1: the snood does not radicalize. sent2: the lithomancer is a haircloth. sent3: that if there is something such that the fact that it is a acanthoma that is not a kind of a philosophy is not correct then the snood is a philosophy is not false. sent4: the beroe is not a pain. sent5: if the beroe is a philosophy it is a haircloth. sent6: the beroe is a kind of a philosophy. sent7: the beroe radicalizes if there is something such that that it is hostile thing that does not radicalizes is not correct. sent8: the beroe does radicalize if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a philosophy and does not radicalize does not hold. sent9: the beroe is not a kind of a acanthoma if the snood is a haircloth and does radicalize. sent10: the electrophorus is not a kind of a acanthoma. sent11: if there exists something such that it is a hostile then the snood is a hostile. sent12: if there is something such that the fact that it is a hostile is not incorrect the beroe is a hostile. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it is a acanthoma that is not a philosophy does not hold. sent14: the snood is a acanthoma if it is a kind of a haircloth. sent15: the transcendentalist is a haircloth. sent16: if there is something such that it radicalizes then the beroe radicalizes. sent17: there exists something such that that it radicalizes and is not a acanthoma is false. sent18: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of hostile thing that does not radicalize is not right. sent19: if the beroe is a kind of a haircloth and does radicalize then the snood is not a kind of a acanthoma. sent20: the beroe is a acanthoma if there exists something such that that it radicalizes and is not a acanthoma is wrong. sent21: the fact that there is something such that the fact that it is a philosophy and is a kind of a acanthoma is not right is not false. sent22: there exists something such that the fact that it radicalizes and is a acanthoma is wrong. sent23: there exists something such that that it is a acanthoma and is not a kind of a haircloth is wrong.
sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the beroe is a haircloth.; sent18 & sent7 -> int2: that the beroe does radicalize is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the beroe is a haircloth and it radicalizes.; int3 & sent19 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the snood is not a acanthoma. ; $context$ = sent1: the snood does not radicalize. sent2: the lithomancer is a haircloth. sent3: that if there is something such that the fact that it is a acanthoma that is not a kind of a philosophy is not correct then the snood is a philosophy is not false. sent4: the beroe is not a pain. sent5: if the beroe is a philosophy it is a haircloth. sent6: the beroe is a kind of a philosophy. sent7: the beroe radicalizes if there is something such that that it is hostile thing that does not radicalizes is not correct. sent8: the beroe does radicalize if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a philosophy and does not radicalize does not hold. sent9: the beroe is not a kind of a acanthoma if the snood is a haircloth and does radicalize. sent10: the electrophorus is not a kind of a acanthoma. sent11: if there exists something such that it is a hostile then the snood is a hostile. sent12: if there is something such that the fact that it is a hostile is not incorrect the beroe is a hostile. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it is a acanthoma that is not a philosophy does not hold. sent14: the snood is a acanthoma if it is a kind of a haircloth. sent15: the transcendentalist is a haircloth. sent16: if there is something such that it radicalizes then the beroe radicalizes. sent17: there exists something such that that it radicalizes and is not a acanthoma is false. sent18: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of hostile thing that does not radicalize is not right. sent19: if the beroe is a kind of a haircloth and does radicalize then the snood is not a kind of a acanthoma. sent20: the beroe is a acanthoma if there exists something such that that it radicalizes and is not a acanthoma is wrong. sent21: the fact that there is something such that the fact that it is a philosophy and is a kind of a acanthoma is not right is not false. sent22: there exists something such that the fact that it radicalizes and is a acanthoma is wrong. sent23: there exists something such that that it is a acanthoma and is not a kind of a haircloth is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the beroe is a haircloth.; sent18 & sent7 -> int2: that the beroe does radicalize is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the beroe is a haircloth and it radicalizes.; int3 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__