there is something such that it is not a kind of a snapshot.
sent1: if the tetranychid is not a slaveholder then the fact that it is not inadequate and it is not endodontics is incorrect. sent2: if the longitude is a full-of-the-moon then the sheik is not a snapshot and it is not a full-of-the-moon. sent3: that the liverwort does not incriminate and is a kind of a slaveholder is false. sent4: the tetranychid does not incriminate. sent5: if the tetranychid is not astronautic the liverwort is not a golf but a slaveholder. sent6: the fact that the sheik does not wane hold if it is not inadequate and it is ceramics. sent7: if the liverwort does not wane and is inadequate then it is not a golf. sent8: if the liverwort is not a kind of a golf and is a slaveholder the radon incriminates. sent9: that the fact that the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and it does not incriminate is not false is not right if it does not wane. sent10: the sheik is adequate and is a ceramics. sent11: if the tetranychid is not a ceramics then the fact that that it is not astronautic and it is a kind of a full-of-the-moon hold is false. sent12: the liverwort does wane. sent13: the fact that the tetranychid is jihadi but it is not a slaveholder is incorrect if it is not a kind of a ceramics. sent14: the radon wanes. sent15: if the radon does incriminate then the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and does not incriminate. sent16: the liverwort is not unsavory. sent17: the fact that if the longitude is not the snapshot then that the longitude is not endodontics and it is not inadequate is not correct is correct. sent18: if the tetranychid is both jihadi and not non-astronautic the longitude is not a snapshot. sent19: the tetranychid is not non-endodontics. sent20: the tetranychid does not wane. sent21: the radon is a full-of-the-moon. sent22: the fact that the tetranychid is not jihadi does not hold if it is endodontics. sent23: the longitude is not inadequate. sent24: the liverwort is not endodontics. sent25: the radon is not non-jihadi.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tetranychid is not astronautic.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the liverwort is not a kind of a golf but it is a slaveholder.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the radon incriminates.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and does not incriminate.; sent6 & sent10 -> int4: the sheik does not wane.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and does not incriminate does not hold.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the tetranychid is astronautic.; sent22 & sent19 -> int8: the tetranychid is jihadi.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the tetranychid is not non-jihadi but astronautic.; int9 & sent18 -> int10: that the longitude is not a snapshot is right.; int10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not a kind of a snapshot. ; $context$ = sent1: if the tetranychid is not a slaveholder then the fact that it is not inadequate and it is not endodontics is incorrect. sent2: if the longitude is a full-of-the-moon then the sheik is not a snapshot and it is not a full-of-the-moon. sent3: that the liverwort does not incriminate and is a kind of a slaveholder is false. sent4: the tetranychid does not incriminate. sent5: if the tetranychid is not astronautic the liverwort is not a golf but a slaveholder. sent6: the fact that the sheik does not wane hold if it is not inadequate and it is ceramics. sent7: if the liverwort does not wane and is inadequate then it is not a golf. sent8: if the liverwort is not a kind of a golf and is a slaveholder the radon incriminates. sent9: that the fact that the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and it does not incriminate is not false is not right if it does not wane. sent10: the sheik is adequate and is a ceramics. sent11: if the tetranychid is not a ceramics then the fact that that it is not astronautic and it is a kind of a full-of-the-moon hold is false. sent12: the liverwort does wane. sent13: the fact that the tetranychid is jihadi but it is not a slaveholder is incorrect if it is not a kind of a ceramics. sent14: the radon wanes. sent15: if the radon does incriminate then the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and does not incriminate. sent16: the liverwort is not unsavory. sent17: the fact that if the longitude is not the snapshot then that the longitude is not endodontics and it is not inadequate is not correct is correct. sent18: if the tetranychid is both jihadi and not non-astronautic the longitude is not a snapshot. sent19: the tetranychid is not non-endodontics. sent20: the tetranychid does not wane. sent21: the radon is a full-of-the-moon. sent22: the fact that the tetranychid is not jihadi does not hold if it is endodontics. sent23: the longitude is not inadequate. sent24: the liverwort is not endodontics. sent25: the radon is not non-jihadi. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tetranychid is not astronautic.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the liverwort is not a kind of a golf but it is a slaveholder.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the radon incriminates.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and does not incriminate.; sent6 & sent10 -> int4: the sheik does not wane.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the sheik is not a full-of-the-moon and does not incriminate does not hold.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the tetranychid is astronautic.; sent22 & sent19 -> int8: the tetranychid is jihadi.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the tetranychid is not non-jihadi but astronautic.; int9 & sent18 -> int10: that the longitude is not a snapshot is right.; int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__