the antidiabetic is accipitrine.
sent1: the antidiabetic is on. sent2: the pellicle is not a banjo if it is a Kenyan and it is micropylar. sent3: the remise is journalistic thing that is fiducial. sent4: the Jute is fiducial. sent5: if that something is a blinks but it does not respect clerk is not correct it is not a kind of a blinks. sent6: the fact that the pellicle is a blinks that does not respect clerk is incorrect if it is not a kind of a banjo. sent7: the fact that the antiknock is both periodontics and not fiducial does not hold if the pellicle is not a blinks. sent8: the fact that the antidiabetic is a blinks and a ammine hold. sent9: something is not on if it is not a bicycle. sent10: the antidiabetic does respect disgustingness. sent11: the antidiabetic is a blinks. sent12: the Jute is not shambolic if it is not a kind of a diplotene. sent13: the jument does not powder yanker if the dihydrostreptomycin is not on and it is not a bicycle. sent14: if there is something such that the fact that it is periodontics and it is not fiducial is incorrect the dihydrostreptomycin is fiducial. sent15: if there is something such that it does not powder yanker then the Jute does not respect disgustingness. sent16: the Jute does not respect antidiabetic. sent17: if the antidiabetic is fiducial then the fact that it is accipitrine is not incorrect. sent18: the isotherm is accipitrine. sent19: the fact that the antidiabetic blinks hold if it does not powder yanker. sent20: The disgustingness does respect antidiabetic. sent21: the Masonite is on. sent22: the Jute is not a bicycle if the antidiabetic respects disgustingness and it powders yanker. sent23: the pellicle is both a Kenyan and micropylar. sent24: the Jute is on. sent25: the potation is a kind of accipitrine thing that does marvel titterer. sent26: if the antidiabetic does not powder yanker it is not non-fiducial but a blinks. sent27: the Jute is accipitrine.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the antidiabetic powders yanker is right.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the antidiabetic respects disgustingness and powders yanker.; int1 & sent22 -> int2: the Jute does not bicycle.; sent9 -> int3: the Jute is not on if the fact that it does not bicycle hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Jute is not on.; int4 & sent24 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the antidiabetic does not powder yanker is not false.; int6 & sent26 -> int7: the antidiabetic is a kind of fiducial a blinks.; int7 -> int8: the antidiabetic is fiducial.; int8 & sent17 -> hypothesis;
the antidiabetic is not accipitrine.
sent5 -> int9: if the fact that the pellicle is a blinks and does not respect clerk does not hold it is not a blinks.; sent2 & sent23 -> int10: the pellicle is not a kind of a banjo.; sent6 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the pellicle is a kind of a blinks and does not respect clerk is not right.; int9 & int11 -> int12: the pellicle does not blink.; sent7 & int12 -> int13: that the antiknock is periodontics but it is not fiducial is false.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that that it is periodontics thing that is non-fiducial does not hold.; int14 & sent14 -> int15: the dihydrostreptomycin is fiducial.;
$hypothesis$ = the antidiabetic is accipitrine. ; $context$ = sent1: the antidiabetic is on. sent2: the pellicle is not a banjo if it is a Kenyan and it is micropylar. sent3: the remise is journalistic thing that is fiducial. sent4: the Jute is fiducial. sent5: if that something is a blinks but it does not respect clerk is not correct it is not a kind of a blinks. sent6: the fact that the pellicle is a blinks that does not respect clerk is incorrect if it is not a kind of a banjo. sent7: the fact that the antiknock is both periodontics and not fiducial does not hold if the pellicle is not a blinks. sent8: the fact that the antidiabetic is a blinks and a ammine hold. sent9: something is not on if it is not a bicycle. sent10: the antidiabetic does respect disgustingness. sent11: the antidiabetic is a blinks. sent12: the Jute is not shambolic if it is not a kind of a diplotene. sent13: the jument does not powder yanker if the dihydrostreptomycin is not on and it is not a bicycle. sent14: if there is something such that the fact that it is periodontics and it is not fiducial is incorrect the dihydrostreptomycin is fiducial. sent15: if there is something such that it does not powder yanker then the Jute does not respect disgustingness. sent16: the Jute does not respect antidiabetic. sent17: if the antidiabetic is fiducial then the fact that it is accipitrine is not incorrect. sent18: the isotherm is accipitrine. sent19: the fact that the antidiabetic blinks hold if it does not powder yanker. sent20: The disgustingness does respect antidiabetic. sent21: the Masonite is on. sent22: the Jute is not a bicycle if the antidiabetic respects disgustingness and it powders yanker. sent23: the pellicle is both a Kenyan and micropylar. sent24: the Jute is on. sent25: the potation is a kind of accipitrine thing that does marvel titterer. sent26: if the antidiabetic does not powder yanker it is not non-fiducial but a blinks. sent27: the Jute is accipitrine. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the antidiabetic powders yanker is right.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the antidiabetic respects disgustingness and powders yanker.; int1 & sent22 -> int2: the Jute does not bicycle.; sent9 -> int3: the Jute is not on if the fact that it does not bicycle hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Jute is not on.; int4 & sent24 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the antidiabetic does not powder yanker is not false.; int6 & sent26 -> int7: the antidiabetic is a kind of fiducial a blinks.; int7 -> int8: the antidiabetic is fiducial.; int8 & sent17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__