the birefringence is not pregnant.
sent1: if the birefringence is a Amaethon then it is not indiscernible. sent2: if something is not abundant and is not Ambrosian then that it is a rollerblader is not wrong. sent3: the birefringence is not indiscernible if it is a kind of a rollerblader or it is a Amaethon or both. sent4: if that the birefringence is not abundant and it is not Ambrosian is not right the farfalle is a subordinate. sent5: if something is not a Nassau or a fluency or both then it is not pregnant. sent6: the farfalle does not subordinate. sent7: if something is both not a rollerblader and not a subordinate it is pregnant. sent8: the birefringence is not Ambrosian. sent9: the abortifacient does rede multitudinousness and/or it is a score if that it is indiscernible is not false. sent10: if something is discernible then it covenants.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the birefringence is not abundant and is not Ambrosian is incorrect.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the farfalle does subordinate.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the birefringence is not abundant and it is not Ambrosian.; sent2 -> int4: if the birefringence is not abundant and it is not Ambrosian it is a rollerblader.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the birefringence is a rollerblader.; int5 -> int6: the birefringence is a kind of a rollerblader or it is a Amaethon or both.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the fact that the birefringence is not indiscernible is true.; sent10 -> int8: if the birefringence is not indiscernible then it does covenant.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the birefringence is a covenant.; sent5 -> int10: if the birefringence is not a Nassau or it is a fluency or both it is not pregnant.;
the birefringence is pregnant.
sent7 -> int11: the birefringence is pregnant if it is not a rollerblader and not subordinate.;
$hypothesis$ = the birefringence is not pregnant. ; $context$ = sent1: if the birefringence is a Amaethon then it is not indiscernible. sent2: if something is not abundant and is not Ambrosian then that it is a rollerblader is not wrong. sent3: the birefringence is not indiscernible if it is a kind of a rollerblader or it is a Amaethon or both. sent4: if that the birefringence is not abundant and it is not Ambrosian is not right the farfalle is a subordinate. sent5: if something is not a Nassau or a fluency or both then it is not pregnant. sent6: the farfalle does not subordinate. sent7: if something is both not a rollerblader and not a subordinate it is pregnant. sent8: the birefringence is not Ambrosian. sent9: the abortifacient does rede multitudinousness and/or it is a score if that it is indiscernible is not false. sent10: if something is discernible then it covenants. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the birefringence is not abundant and is not Ambrosian is incorrect.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the farfalle does subordinate.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the birefringence is not abundant and it is not Ambrosian.; sent2 -> int4: if the birefringence is not abundant and it is not Ambrosian it is a rollerblader.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the birefringence is a rollerblader.; int5 -> int6: the birefringence is a kind of a rollerblader or it is a Amaethon or both.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the fact that the birefringence is not indiscernible is true.; sent10 -> int8: if the birefringence is not indiscernible then it does covenant.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the birefringence is a covenant.; sent5 -> int10: if the birefringence is not a Nassau or it is a fluency or both it is not pregnant.; __UNKNOWN__