the fact that the osmium is both non-squinty and not non-Cappadocian is incorrect.
sent1: the sporocarp is not a petrochemical and it is not a paramyxovirus if there is something such that it is not an isolationism. sent2: that the osmium is not squinty but it is Cappadocian is not true if the exhibitionism is not squinty. sent3: that the astilbe does not contort Bristol and is not bridgeable is not true. sent4: the tricyclic is not a kind of an isolationism if that the astilbe does not contort Bristol and it is not bridgeable is not correct.
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the tricyclic is not a kind of an isolationism.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is not an isolationism.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the sporocarp is not a petrochemical and it is not a paramyxovirus.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the osmium is both non-squinty and not non-Cappadocian is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the sporocarp is not a petrochemical and it is not a paramyxovirus if there is something such that it is not an isolationism. sent2: that the osmium is not squinty but it is Cappadocian is not true if the exhibitionism is not squinty. sent3: that the astilbe does not contort Bristol and is not bridgeable is not true. sent4: the tricyclic is not a kind of an isolationism if that the astilbe does not contort Bristol and it is not bridgeable is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the tricyclic is not a kind of an isolationism.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is not an isolationism.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the sporocarp is not a petrochemical and it is not a paramyxovirus.; __UNKNOWN__