the ex-boyfriend is a Ticino.
sent1: if the puddle is not a kind of a Naiki the fact that the ex-boyfriend is not a Ticino and does not reflectorize puddle is incorrect. sent2: the condensate is a Ticino if the fact that it is not epiphyseal and does not draw haze is incorrect. sent3: the fact that the condensate does not draw haze and it is not epiphyseal is false if the Guru is not a Naiki. sent4: the puddle is not synoptic if it is a kind of non-cash-and-carry thing that does reflectorize puddle. sent5: if the condensate does not draw haze and it is not synoptic then it does not reflectorize puddle. sent6: the fact that the Guru is a kind of a Ticino and is not a Naiki is false. sent7: there exists something such that that it is both not epiphyseal and not synoptic is wrong. sent8: if the puddle is non-cash-and-carry and it does not reflectorize puddle then it is not synoptic. sent9: there is something such that it does not comfort Sylviidae. sent10: the ex-boyfriend is not a Ticino if it is not synoptic and it does not reflectorize puddle. sent11: the Guru is not a Naiki if there exists something such that that it is not cash-and-carry and it does not reflectorize puddle is wrong. sent12: the ex-boyfriend is a kind of a Ticino if the condensate is a T-man. sent13: the fact that the Guru is not a Naiki and it is not synoptic is false. sent14: the puddle is synoptic if something does not comfort Sylviidae. sent15: something is a syndicate if the fact that it is isotopic is right. sent16: a epiphyseal thing is both not a Naiki and not synoptic. sent17: if something that is synoptic is a Naiki it is not a Ticino. sent18: there are non-epiphyseal and non-synoptic things. sent19: the puddle is not a kind of a Ticino.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the puddle is a kind of non-cash-and-carry thing that does not reflectorize puddle.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the puddle is not synoptic.; sent9 & sent14 -> int2: the puddle is synoptic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the fact that the puddle is non-cash-and-carry thing that does not reflectorize puddle does not hold.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that the fact that it is not cash-and-carry and does not reflectorize puddle does not hold.; int5 & sent11 -> int6: the Guru is not a Naiki.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: that that the condensate does not draw haze and is not epiphyseal is not wrong is incorrect.;
the ex-boyfriend is not a Ticino.
sent17 -> int8: the ex-boyfriend is not a Ticino if it is synoptic thing that is a Naiki.;
$hypothesis$ = the ex-boyfriend is a Ticino. ; $context$ = sent1: if the puddle is not a kind of a Naiki the fact that the ex-boyfriend is not a Ticino and does not reflectorize puddle is incorrect. sent2: the condensate is a Ticino if the fact that it is not epiphyseal and does not draw haze is incorrect. sent3: the fact that the condensate does not draw haze and it is not epiphyseal is false if the Guru is not a Naiki. sent4: the puddle is not synoptic if it is a kind of non-cash-and-carry thing that does reflectorize puddle. sent5: if the condensate does not draw haze and it is not synoptic then it does not reflectorize puddle. sent6: the fact that the Guru is a kind of a Ticino and is not a Naiki is false. sent7: there exists something such that that it is both not epiphyseal and not synoptic is wrong. sent8: if the puddle is non-cash-and-carry and it does not reflectorize puddle then it is not synoptic. sent9: there is something such that it does not comfort Sylviidae. sent10: the ex-boyfriend is not a Ticino if it is not synoptic and it does not reflectorize puddle. sent11: the Guru is not a Naiki if there exists something such that that it is not cash-and-carry and it does not reflectorize puddle is wrong. sent12: the ex-boyfriend is a kind of a Ticino if the condensate is a T-man. sent13: the fact that the Guru is not a Naiki and it is not synoptic is false. sent14: the puddle is synoptic if something does not comfort Sylviidae. sent15: something is a syndicate if the fact that it is isotopic is right. sent16: a epiphyseal thing is both not a Naiki and not synoptic. sent17: if something that is synoptic is a Naiki it is not a Ticino. sent18: there are non-epiphyseal and non-synoptic things. sent19: the puddle is not a kind of a Ticino. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the puddle is a kind of non-cash-and-carry thing that does not reflectorize puddle.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the puddle is not synoptic.; sent9 & sent14 -> int2: the puddle is synoptic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the fact that the puddle is non-cash-and-carry thing that does not reflectorize puddle does not hold.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that the fact that it is not cash-and-carry and does not reflectorize puddle does not hold.; int5 & sent11 -> int6: the Guru is not a Naiki.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: that that the condensate does not draw haze and is not epiphyseal is not wrong is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__