the obsessive is a kind of a amine.
sent1: the obsessive is a amine if the transpiration does lexicalize heroine. sent2: if the transpiration is not a kind of a sourwood then the fact that the support does not lexicalize churn but it is a amine does not hold. sent3: the support is operational. sent4: if the fact that the polony is not algal and not amniotic is false the transpiration is not a sourwood. sent5: if the support does lexicalize churn then it is a sourwood. sent6: if something is a sourwood and it is algal it is not amniotic. sent7: The fact that the churn lexicalizes support is right. sent8: the fact that the support lexicalizes churn is right. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of a down and/or is not nonenzymatic does not hold then the fact that it is not nonretractile is not false. sent10: that the transpiration is nonretractile and it does lexicalize heroine does not hold if the support is not nonretractile. sent11: if there exists something such that it is not a briard then the fact that the fact that the apar does down and/or it is not nonenzymatic is false is not false. sent12: something is not nonretractile if the fact that it does lexicalize astrology and it is nonretractile is not true. sent13: the support is amniotic. sent14: the fact that the transpiration is nonretractile thing that does not lexicalize heroine does not hold if the support is not nonretractile. sent15: if there are non-nonretractile things the fact that the fact that the polony does lexicalize astrology and it is nonretractile is not true is correct. sent16: the support is non-chlamydial if the fact that it is not algal is not wrong. sent17: that the obsessive does not lexicalize churn is correct. sent18: if that the transpiration is nonretractile but it does not lexicalize heroine is not correct the obsessive is a kind of a amine. sent19: if the obsessive is not chlamydial it is not a kind of a amine. sent20: something is not chlamydial if the fact that it is chlamydial and lexicalizes heroine is incorrect. sent21: the fergusonite is not a briard. sent22: if something is not nonretractile the fact that it is chlamydial and does lexicalize heroine does not hold. sent23: that something is not algal and it is not amniotic is wrong if it is non-chlamydial. sent24: the fact that the fact that the transpiration is a kind of nonretractile thing that lexicalizes heroine is not incorrect is not right.
sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the support is a kind of a sourwood.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the support is algal.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the support is a sourwood and it is algal.; sent6 -> int3: the support is not amniotic if it is a sourwood and it is algal.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the support is not amniotic.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the support is not algal.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: the support is not chlamydial.;
the obsessive is not a amine.
sent23 -> int8: if the polony is not chlamydial the fact that it is a kind of non-algal thing that is not amniotic is not correct.; sent20 -> int9: that the polony is not chlamydial is true if the fact that it is chlamydial and it lexicalizes heroine is not correct.; sent22 -> int10: that the polony is chlamydial thing that does lexicalize heroine is not correct if it is not nonretractile.; sent12 -> int11: if the fact that the polony lexicalizes astrology and it is nonretractile is not true then it is not nonretractile.; sent9 -> int12: the apar is not nonretractile if that it is down and/or not nonenzymatic is not true.; sent21 -> int13: there exists something such that it is not a briard.; int13 & sent11 -> int14: the fact that the apar is a kind of a down or it is not nonenzymatic or both is not correct.; int12 & int14 -> int15: the apar is not nonretractile.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that it is not nonretractile.; int16 & sent15 -> int17: that the fact that the polony does lexicalize astrology and is nonretractile is not correct is true.; int11 & int17 -> int18: that the polony is not nonretractile is not false.; int10 & int18 -> int19: the fact that the polony is chlamydial and lexicalizes heroine does not hold.; int9 & int19 -> int20: the polony is not chlamydial.; int8 & int20 -> int21: the fact that the polony is non-algal and non-amniotic does not hold.; sent4 & int21 -> int22: the transpiration is not a sourwood.; sent2 & int22 -> int23: that the support does not lexicalize churn and is a amine is not true.; int23 -> int24: there is something such that the fact that it does not lexicalize churn and is a kind of a amine is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the obsessive is a kind of a amine. ; $context$ = sent1: the obsessive is a amine if the transpiration does lexicalize heroine. sent2: if the transpiration is not a kind of a sourwood then the fact that the support does not lexicalize churn but it is a amine does not hold. sent3: the support is operational. sent4: if the fact that the polony is not algal and not amniotic is false the transpiration is not a sourwood. sent5: if the support does lexicalize churn then it is a sourwood. sent6: if something is a sourwood and it is algal it is not amniotic. sent7: The fact that the churn lexicalizes support is right. sent8: the fact that the support lexicalizes churn is right. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of a down and/or is not nonenzymatic does not hold then the fact that it is not nonretractile is not false. sent10: that the transpiration is nonretractile and it does lexicalize heroine does not hold if the support is not nonretractile. sent11: if there exists something such that it is not a briard then the fact that the fact that the apar does down and/or it is not nonenzymatic is false is not false. sent12: something is not nonretractile if the fact that it does lexicalize astrology and it is nonretractile is not true. sent13: the support is amniotic. sent14: the fact that the transpiration is nonretractile thing that does not lexicalize heroine does not hold if the support is not nonretractile. sent15: if there are non-nonretractile things the fact that the fact that the polony does lexicalize astrology and it is nonretractile is not true is correct. sent16: the support is non-chlamydial if the fact that it is not algal is not wrong. sent17: that the obsessive does not lexicalize churn is correct. sent18: if that the transpiration is nonretractile but it does not lexicalize heroine is not correct the obsessive is a kind of a amine. sent19: if the obsessive is not chlamydial it is not a kind of a amine. sent20: something is not chlamydial if the fact that it is chlamydial and lexicalizes heroine is incorrect. sent21: the fergusonite is not a briard. sent22: if something is not nonretractile the fact that it is chlamydial and does lexicalize heroine does not hold. sent23: that something is not algal and it is not amniotic is wrong if it is non-chlamydial. sent24: the fact that the fact that the transpiration is a kind of nonretractile thing that lexicalizes heroine is not incorrect is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the support is a kind of a sourwood.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the support is algal.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the support is a sourwood and it is algal.; sent6 -> int3: the support is not amniotic if it is a sourwood and it is algal.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the support is not amniotic.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the support is not algal.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: the support is not chlamydial.; __UNKNOWN__