the tricyclic is not intradermal.
sent1: that the densitometer is a postmodernism and it is not non-gingival is not true if the commissariat does not overpower stagecoach. sent2: the placoderm does barb mortification and is not a Anthony. sent3: that the stagecoach is not a kind of a postmodernism is right. sent4: the fact that something is a kind of non-basophilic thing that is not Dostoevskian does not hold if it overpowers heterosexual. sent5: the stagecoach is a postmodernism if the fact that the tricyclic does not overpower heterosexual and does not overpower densitometer is not correct. sent6: that the tricyclic is basophilic is right if the placoderm does barb mortification but it is not a Anthony. sent7: the tricyclic is intradermal and it is basophilic if the placoderm is non-Dostoevskian. sent8: everything does not plunge. sent9: if the fact that the tricyclic is not basophilic and is not Dostoevskian does not hold then that the placoderm is not non-intradermal is not incorrect. sent10: if the stagecoach barbs mortification and is not a kind of a Anthony then the placoderm is a postmodernism. sent11: if something is not a plunge then it is precocious and it is a vice. sent12: the fact that the tricyclic does not overpower heterosexual and does not overpower densitometer does not hold if the fact that it is not Dostoevskian is correct. sent13: if the stagecoach is non-Dostoevskian thing that does not overpower densitometer then that the placoderm is not Dostoevskian hold. sent14: if something is a kind of a vice then the fact that it is not repulsive and it is viviparous is incorrect. sent15: the stagecoach overpowers stagecoach if there exists something such that the fact that it is not repulsive and it is viviparous is false. sent16: something is not gingival and does overpower heterosexual if it does overpower stagecoach. sent17: the stagecoach is a postmodernism if the fact that the tricyclic does overpower heterosexual is not wrong. sent18: if the placoderm is intradermal the fact that the Adams is not a thoracotomy and does not overpower densitometer is not correct. sent19: the placoderm is not a Anthony. sent20: the tricyclic is not Dostoevskian if it is basophilic and intradermal.
sent6 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the tricyclic is basophilic is correct.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tricyclic is intradermal.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the tricyclic is both not non-basophilic and intradermal.; int2 & sent20 -> int3: the tricyclic is not Dostoevskian.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: that the tricyclic does not overpower heterosexual and it does not overpower densitometer is not correct.; int4 & sent5 -> int5: the stagecoach is a postmodernism.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the tricyclic is intradermal.
$hypothesis$ = the tricyclic is not intradermal. ; $context$ = sent1: that the densitometer is a postmodernism and it is not non-gingival is not true if the commissariat does not overpower stagecoach. sent2: the placoderm does barb mortification and is not a Anthony. sent3: that the stagecoach is not a kind of a postmodernism is right. sent4: the fact that something is a kind of non-basophilic thing that is not Dostoevskian does not hold if it overpowers heterosexual. sent5: the stagecoach is a postmodernism if the fact that the tricyclic does not overpower heterosexual and does not overpower densitometer is not correct. sent6: that the tricyclic is basophilic is right if the placoderm does barb mortification but it is not a Anthony. sent7: the tricyclic is intradermal and it is basophilic if the placoderm is non-Dostoevskian. sent8: everything does not plunge. sent9: if the fact that the tricyclic is not basophilic and is not Dostoevskian does not hold then that the placoderm is not non-intradermal is not incorrect. sent10: if the stagecoach barbs mortification and is not a kind of a Anthony then the placoderm is a postmodernism. sent11: if something is not a plunge then it is precocious and it is a vice. sent12: the fact that the tricyclic does not overpower heterosexual and does not overpower densitometer does not hold if the fact that it is not Dostoevskian is correct. sent13: if the stagecoach is non-Dostoevskian thing that does not overpower densitometer then that the placoderm is not Dostoevskian hold. sent14: if something is a kind of a vice then the fact that it is not repulsive and it is viviparous is incorrect. sent15: the stagecoach overpowers stagecoach if there exists something such that the fact that it is not repulsive and it is viviparous is false. sent16: something is not gingival and does overpower heterosexual if it does overpower stagecoach. sent17: the stagecoach is a postmodernism if the fact that the tricyclic does overpower heterosexual is not wrong. sent18: if the placoderm is intradermal the fact that the Adams is not a thoracotomy and does not overpower densitometer is not correct. sent19: the placoderm is not a Anthony. sent20: the tricyclic is not Dostoevskian if it is basophilic and intradermal. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the tricyclic is basophilic is correct.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tricyclic is intradermal.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the tricyclic is both not non-basophilic and intradermal.; int2 & sent20 -> int3: the tricyclic is not Dostoevskian.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: that the tricyclic does not overpower heterosexual and it does not overpower densitometer is not correct.; int4 & sent5 -> int5: the stagecoach is a postmodernism.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__