the bourn is a thiamine.
sent1: the peeler is philological. sent2: the fact that the blackbird is a constitutional but it is not electrical is not right if the verdin is not electrical. sent3: if the fact that the peeler is not blastoporal is not false then the fact that the pomologist is blastoporal and does cleave Akhenaton does not hold. sent4: if that the blackbird is not constitutional and it is not electrical does not hold then the bourn is a thiamine. sent5: that something does not cleave Akhenaton and it does not cleave Regalecidae is incorrect if it is not philological. sent6: that the blackbird is constitutional thing that is not electrical does not hold. sent7: that the peeler is electrical and it is blastoporal does not hold. sent8: something is a manageability if it is electrical. sent9: that the verdin is not blastoporal is not incorrect. sent10: that the blackbird is not a kind of a constitutional but it is electrical is wrong if the verdin is not electrical. sent11: something that is philological thing that is a manageability is not blastoporal. sent12: the verdin is not electrical if the fact that the pomologist is not blastoporal is not incorrect. sent13: the fact that the blackbird is not constitutional and it is not electrical is wrong if the verdin is not electrical. sent14: the peeler is a manageability. sent15: that the pomologist is blastoporal and it is philological is false. sent16: the pomologist is electrical. sent17: the fact that the pomologist is both non-electrical and blastoporal is not true. sent18: the fact that the blackbird is not constitutional but electrical is not right. sent19: the pomologist is blastoporal. sent20: the blackbird cleaves Akhenaton. sent21: if the peeler is not electrical then that the verdin is not a manageability and is not electrical is not true. sent22: if that the pomologist is blastoporal and it does cleave Akhenaton is not right the fact that the verdin is not electrical is not incorrect.
sent1 & sent14 -> int1: the peeler is philological and it is a manageability.; sent11 -> int2: the peeler is not blastoporal if it is philological and it is a kind of a manageability.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the peeler is not blastoporal.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the fact that the pomologist is blastoporal and does cleave Akhenaton does not hold.; int4 & sent22 -> int5: the verdin is not electrical.; int5 & sent13 -> int6: the fact that the blackbird is both not constitutional and not electrical does not hold.; int6 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the Englishwoman does not cleave Akhenaton and does not cleave Regalecidae is wrong.
sent5 -> int7: the fact that the Englishwoman does not cleave Akhenaton and does not cleave Regalecidae does not hold if it is not philological.;
$hypothesis$ = the bourn is a thiamine. ; $context$ = sent1: the peeler is philological. sent2: the fact that the blackbird is a constitutional but it is not electrical is not right if the verdin is not electrical. sent3: if the fact that the peeler is not blastoporal is not false then the fact that the pomologist is blastoporal and does cleave Akhenaton does not hold. sent4: if that the blackbird is not constitutional and it is not electrical does not hold then the bourn is a thiamine. sent5: that something does not cleave Akhenaton and it does not cleave Regalecidae is incorrect if it is not philological. sent6: that the blackbird is constitutional thing that is not electrical does not hold. sent7: that the peeler is electrical and it is blastoporal does not hold. sent8: something is a manageability if it is electrical. sent9: that the verdin is not blastoporal is not incorrect. sent10: that the blackbird is not a kind of a constitutional but it is electrical is wrong if the verdin is not electrical. sent11: something that is philological thing that is a manageability is not blastoporal. sent12: the verdin is not electrical if the fact that the pomologist is not blastoporal is not incorrect. sent13: the fact that the blackbird is not constitutional and it is not electrical is wrong if the verdin is not electrical. sent14: the peeler is a manageability. sent15: that the pomologist is blastoporal and it is philological is false. sent16: the pomologist is electrical. sent17: the fact that the pomologist is both non-electrical and blastoporal is not true. sent18: the fact that the blackbird is not constitutional but electrical is not right. sent19: the pomologist is blastoporal. sent20: the blackbird cleaves Akhenaton. sent21: if the peeler is not electrical then that the verdin is not a manageability and is not electrical is not true. sent22: if that the pomologist is blastoporal and it does cleave Akhenaton is not right the fact that the verdin is not electrical is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent14 -> int1: the peeler is philological and it is a manageability.; sent11 -> int2: the peeler is not blastoporal if it is philological and it is a kind of a manageability.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the peeler is not blastoporal.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the fact that the pomologist is blastoporal and does cleave Akhenaton does not hold.; int4 & sent22 -> int5: the verdin is not electrical.; int5 & sent13 -> int6: the fact that the blackbird is both not constitutional and not electrical does not hold.; int6 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__