the grasshopper is a kind of a grits.
sent1: the wince is not a plenipotentiary if the fact that the sternwheeler zeroes and it is serologic does not hold. sent2: if the wince is alopecic that the sternwheeler is a plenipotentiary and/or it is not irreverent does not hold. sent3: the chopsteak is irreverent. sent4: that something is uvular hold. sent5: if the fact that something is not a cadenced and is alopecic is wrong it is an inventory. sent6: the chopsteak is irreverent if there is something such that it is not a plenipotentiary. sent7: if the fact that something is a minnow and/or is a kind of a plenipotentiary is not correct then that it is not a grits hold. sent8: something that is not alopecic is an inventory. sent9: the chopsteak is abolitionary if the grasshopper is abolitionary. sent10: that the grasshopper is a cadenced is true. sent11: the wince is not an inventory if the chopsteak does grit. sent12: if there exists something such that it is not a plenipotentiary then the chopsteak is irreverent but not a stabber. sent13: if the chopsteak is not a stabber the fact that it is both not a cadenced and alopecic does not hold. sent14: there is something such that it is a plenipotentiary. sent15: if the sternwheeler is not a zero the wince is not a plenipotentiary. sent16: the sternwheeler is not a minnow. sent17: there is nothing such that it is alopecic and it is not irreverent. sent18: that the sternwheeler is not non-zero and it is serologic is incorrect if it is not a minnow. sent19: that if something is a kind of a minnow then it is a kind of a stabber is not false. sent20: if the chopsteak is an inventory the grasshopper grits. sent21: if the chopsteak is abolitionary that the fact that it is not a kind of a grits is not incorrect is false. sent22: the chopsteak is an inventory if it is not alopecic. sent23: the wince is alopecic and it is a cadenced if it does not inventory.
sent18 & sent16 -> int1: that the sternwheeler does zero and it is serologic is incorrect.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the wince is not a plenipotentiary.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that it is not a plenipotentiary.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the chopsteak is irreverent but it is not a stabber.; int4 -> int5: the chopsteak is not a stabber.; int5 & sent13 -> int6: the fact that the chopsteak is not a cadenced but it is alopecic is not right.; sent5 -> int7: the chopsteak inventories if the fact that it is not a cadenced and is alopecic is not true.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the chopsteak is a kind of an inventory.; int8 & sent20 -> hypothesis;
the grasshopper is not a grits.
sent7 -> int9: if the fact that either the grasshopper is a minnow or it is a kind of a plenipotentiary or both does not hold then it does not grit.; sent17 -> int10: the fact that that the sternwheeler is both alopecic and not irreverent hold is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the grasshopper is a kind of a grits. ; $context$ = sent1: the wince is not a plenipotentiary if the fact that the sternwheeler zeroes and it is serologic does not hold. sent2: if the wince is alopecic that the sternwheeler is a plenipotentiary and/or it is not irreverent does not hold. sent3: the chopsteak is irreverent. sent4: that something is uvular hold. sent5: if the fact that something is not a cadenced and is alopecic is wrong it is an inventory. sent6: the chopsteak is irreverent if there is something such that it is not a plenipotentiary. sent7: if the fact that something is a minnow and/or is a kind of a plenipotentiary is not correct then that it is not a grits hold. sent8: something that is not alopecic is an inventory. sent9: the chopsteak is abolitionary if the grasshopper is abolitionary. sent10: that the grasshopper is a cadenced is true. sent11: the wince is not an inventory if the chopsteak does grit. sent12: if there exists something such that it is not a plenipotentiary then the chopsteak is irreverent but not a stabber. sent13: if the chopsteak is not a stabber the fact that it is both not a cadenced and alopecic does not hold. sent14: there is something such that it is a plenipotentiary. sent15: if the sternwheeler is not a zero the wince is not a plenipotentiary. sent16: the sternwheeler is not a minnow. sent17: there is nothing such that it is alopecic and it is not irreverent. sent18: that the sternwheeler is not non-zero and it is serologic is incorrect if it is not a minnow. sent19: that if something is a kind of a minnow then it is a kind of a stabber is not false. sent20: if the chopsteak is an inventory the grasshopper grits. sent21: if the chopsteak is abolitionary that the fact that it is not a kind of a grits is not incorrect is false. sent22: the chopsteak is an inventory if it is not alopecic. sent23: the wince is alopecic and it is a cadenced if it does not inventory. ; $proof$ = 
sent18 & sent16 -> int1: that the sternwheeler does zero and it is serologic is incorrect.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the wince is not a plenipotentiary.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that it is not a plenipotentiary.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the chopsteak is irreverent but it is not a stabber.; int4 -> int5: the chopsteak is not a stabber.; int5 & sent13 -> int6: the fact that the chopsteak is not a cadenced but it is alopecic is not right.; sent5 -> int7: the chopsteak inventories if the fact that it is not a cadenced and is alopecic is not true.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the chopsteak is a kind of an inventory.; int8 & sent20 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__