that the answer is not microelectronic is not false.
sent1: if the fact that the racket is unmanly but it is not a Gavialidae does not hold then the fact that it does clear Calais hold. sent2: something is microelectronic if it does clear Calais and does not bonnet bunchberry. sent3: if the isosorbide greases moralization and is dithyrambic then the racket does not grease grave. sent4: the racket visas racket. sent5: if the fact that something does not salt but it is bibliographic is not true then it does not bonnet procession. sent6: the fact that the answer does not bonnet bunchberry but it bonnets procession does not hold if the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry. sent7: the racket does not clear Calais if the answer is microelectronic but it is not a kind of a Gavialidae. sent8: The Calais does not clear racket. sent9: if something is a spear then that it is not a salt and is bibliographic is incorrect. sent10: the fact that the racket does not bonnet bunchberry but it is a Gavialidae is wrong. sent11: if the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry that the answer does not bonnet bunchberry and does not bonnet procession is not right. sent12: the fact that the answer is not microelectronic is correct if the fact that it does not bonnet bunchberry and does not bonnet procession does not hold. sent13: that the fact that the answer is microelectronic and does visa Schlesinger is not correct hold. sent14: if the answer is not a Gavialidae the fact that that the racket is a Gavialidae and does not clear Calais is not false is not correct. sent15: the answer does not clear Calais. sent16: if the racket does not bonnet procession then the answer does clear Calais and does not bonnet bunchberry. sent17: the isosorbide does not bonnet procession. sent18: if the racket is unmanly and not a Gavialidae then that the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry is not wrong. sent19: that if the racket does not grease grave the racket disarms and is a spear is true. sent20: that the racket is unmanly a Gavialidae is wrong. sent21: the isosorbide does grease moralization and it does grease whispered. sent22: the fact that the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry but it is microelectronic is not correct. sent23: if the answer bonnets procession it is unmanly. sent24: if the fact that the racket is non-microelectronic thing that does not clear Calais is wrong it does not bonnet bunchberry. sent25: if the answer is microelectronic but it does not bonnet bunchberry the isosorbide is not a Gavialidae.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the racket is unmanly thing that is not a kind of a Gavialidae is wrong.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the racket clears Calais hold.;
the answer is microelectronic.
sent2 -> int2: if the answer clears Calais but it does not bonnet bunchberry it is microelectronic.; sent5 -> int3: if the fact that the racket is not a salt but bibliographic is not correct then it does not bonnet procession.; sent9 -> int4: if that the racket is a spear is true then that it is not a kind of a salt and is bibliographic does not hold.; sent21 -> int5: the isosorbide greases moralization.;
$hypothesis$ = that the answer is not microelectronic is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the racket is unmanly but it is not a Gavialidae does not hold then the fact that it does clear Calais hold. sent2: something is microelectronic if it does clear Calais and does not bonnet bunchberry. sent3: if the isosorbide greases moralization and is dithyrambic then the racket does not grease grave. sent4: the racket visas racket. sent5: if the fact that something does not salt but it is bibliographic is not true then it does not bonnet procession. sent6: the fact that the answer does not bonnet bunchberry but it bonnets procession does not hold if the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry. sent7: the racket does not clear Calais if the answer is microelectronic but it is not a kind of a Gavialidae. sent8: The Calais does not clear racket. sent9: if something is a spear then that it is not a salt and is bibliographic is incorrect. sent10: the fact that the racket does not bonnet bunchberry but it is a Gavialidae is wrong. sent11: if the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry that the answer does not bonnet bunchberry and does not bonnet procession is not right. sent12: the fact that the answer is not microelectronic is correct if the fact that it does not bonnet bunchberry and does not bonnet procession does not hold. sent13: that the fact that the answer is microelectronic and does visa Schlesinger is not correct hold. sent14: if the answer is not a Gavialidae the fact that that the racket is a Gavialidae and does not clear Calais is not false is not correct. sent15: the answer does not clear Calais. sent16: if the racket does not bonnet procession then the answer does clear Calais and does not bonnet bunchberry. sent17: the isosorbide does not bonnet procession. sent18: if the racket is unmanly and not a Gavialidae then that the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry is not wrong. sent19: that if the racket does not grease grave the racket disarms and is a spear is true. sent20: that the racket is unmanly a Gavialidae is wrong. sent21: the isosorbide does grease moralization and it does grease whispered. sent22: the fact that the isosorbide does not bonnet bunchberry but it is microelectronic is not correct. sent23: if the answer bonnets procession it is unmanly. sent24: if the fact that the racket is non-microelectronic thing that does not clear Calais is wrong it does not bonnet bunchberry. sent25: if the answer is microelectronic but it does not bonnet bunchberry the isosorbide is not a Gavialidae. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the racket is unmanly thing that is not a kind of a Gavialidae is wrong.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the racket clears Calais hold.; __UNKNOWN__