the Diesel is not an adulteration.
sent1: the whey does not besiege bombardment if the fact that the GPS is not a sarsaparilla and it is not an abolition is not true. sent2: the spoonbill is noninstitutional. sent3: the fact that the Burr is a transpiration and it props Kandy is not right if the GPS is not Muscovite. sent4: if the fact that the Burr is a transpiration and does prop Kandy is not correct the Diesel is not an adulteration. sent5: the fact that something is both not a sarsaparilla and not an abolition is incorrect if it is a Muscovite. sent6: if the fact that something is noninstitutional and it is ungrateful is wrong it is not noninstitutional. sent7: if something is not a shadow then that either it is not dizygotic or it is irresistible or both does not hold. sent8: that something is not a transpiration and it is not dizygotic is incorrect if it is not irresistible. sent9: the GPS is a kind of a prologue. sent10: if the fact that something is non-dizygotic and/or not non-irresistible does not hold then it does besiege bombardment. sent11: something is a kind of non-Gallic thing that does not moor TT if it is a kind of a headrest. sent12: if something does not moor TT the fact that it is noninstitutional and it is ungrateful is incorrect. sent13: the whey is a transpiration if there is something such that that it is both not a transpiration and not dizygotic is not true. sent14: the whey is not a shadow if that it is a shadow and noninstitutional is not true. sent15: the fact that the whey is a shadow that is noninstitutional does not hold. sent16: a transpiration does prop Kandy. sent17: that something is a shadow and it is irresistible does not hold if it is not noninstitutional. sent18: the Burr is not irresistible if the fact that the golem is a shadow and it is irresistible is incorrect. sent19: that something is a kind of Muscovite thing that does not besiege bombardment does not hold if it does prop Kandy.
sent5 -> int1: if the GPS is Muscovite the fact that it is not a kind of a sarsaparilla and is not a kind of an abolition is wrong.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the GPS is a kind of a Muscovite.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the GPS is not a sarsaparilla and not an abolition is incorrect.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the whey does not besiege bombardment.; sent10 -> int4: if the fact that the whey is either not dizygotic or irresistible or both is not true it besieges bombardment.; sent7 -> int5: if the whey is not a kind of a shadow then that it either is not dizygotic or is irresistible or both is wrong.; sent14 & sent15 -> int6: the whey does not shadow.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the whey is not dizygotic or is irresistible or both does not hold.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the whey does besiege bombardment.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the GPS is not a Muscovite.; int10 & sent3 -> int11: the fact that that the Burr is a kind of a transpiration and does prop Kandy is incorrect hold.; int11 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the Diesel is an adulteration.
sent19 -> int12: the fact that the whey is a Muscovite and does not besiege bombardment does not hold if it does prop Kandy.; sent16 -> int13: the whey does prop Kandy if the fact that it is a transpiration is correct.; sent8 -> int14: the fact that the Burr is not a transpiration and it is not dizygotic does not hold if it is not irresistible.; sent6 -> int15: if that the sequoia is noninstitutional and it is ungrateful does not hold then it is not noninstitutional.; sent12 -> int16: the fact that the assembly is both noninstitutional and ungrateful is incorrect if it does not moor TT.; sent11 -> int17: the bones is a kind of non-Gallic thing that does not moor TT if it is a headrest.; sent17 -> int18: if the tattler is institutional the fact that it is a kind of a shadow and it is irresistible is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the Diesel is not an adulteration. ; $context$ = sent1: the whey does not besiege bombardment if the fact that the GPS is not a sarsaparilla and it is not an abolition is not true. sent2: the spoonbill is noninstitutional. sent3: the fact that the Burr is a transpiration and it props Kandy is not right if the GPS is not Muscovite. sent4: if the fact that the Burr is a transpiration and does prop Kandy is not correct the Diesel is not an adulteration. sent5: the fact that something is both not a sarsaparilla and not an abolition is incorrect if it is a Muscovite. sent6: if the fact that something is noninstitutional and it is ungrateful is wrong it is not noninstitutional. sent7: if something is not a shadow then that either it is not dizygotic or it is irresistible or both does not hold. sent8: that something is not a transpiration and it is not dizygotic is incorrect if it is not irresistible. sent9: the GPS is a kind of a prologue. sent10: if the fact that something is non-dizygotic and/or not non-irresistible does not hold then it does besiege bombardment. sent11: something is a kind of non-Gallic thing that does not moor TT if it is a kind of a headrest. sent12: if something does not moor TT the fact that it is noninstitutional and it is ungrateful is incorrect. sent13: the whey is a transpiration if there is something such that that it is both not a transpiration and not dizygotic is not true. sent14: the whey is not a shadow if that it is a shadow and noninstitutional is not true. sent15: the fact that the whey is a shadow that is noninstitutional does not hold. sent16: a transpiration does prop Kandy. sent17: that something is a shadow and it is irresistible does not hold if it is not noninstitutional. sent18: the Burr is not irresistible if the fact that the golem is a shadow and it is irresistible is incorrect. sent19: that something is a kind of Muscovite thing that does not besiege bombardment does not hold if it does prop Kandy. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: if the GPS is Muscovite the fact that it is not a kind of a sarsaparilla and is not a kind of an abolition is wrong.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the GPS is a kind of a Muscovite.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the GPS is not a sarsaparilla and not an abolition is incorrect.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the whey does not besiege bombardment.; sent10 -> int4: if the fact that the whey is either not dizygotic or irresistible or both is not true it besieges bombardment.; sent7 -> int5: if the whey is not a kind of a shadow then that it either is not dizygotic or is irresistible or both is wrong.; sent14 & sent15 -> int6: the whey does not shadow.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the whey is not dizygotic or is irresistible or both does not hold.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the whey does besiege bombardment.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the GPS is not a Muscovite.; int10 & sent3 -> int11: the fact that that the Burr is a kind of a transpiration and does prop Kandy is incorrect hold.; int11 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__