the fact that the maker is a blasphemy is not false.
sent1: if that something is docile and designs varnisher is not right then it is not terminological. sent2: the fact that the lotus-eater is testicular and a radiocarbon is not correct. sent3: something is terminological and it does monetize clarion. sent4: there is something such that it is terminological. sent5: if something is not testicular then that the fact that it is docile and it does design varnisher is true is not true. sent6: that that the lotus-eater is both testicular and not a radiocarbon is not true hold. sent7: the Sculptor is not terminological if it is not docile. sent8: if the fact that something is not a kind of a radiocarbon and does monetize clarion is false then it is testicular. sent9: if something that is terminological does not design varnisher the astatine is a kind of a radiocarbon. sent10: if something that is terminological does not monetize clarion then the maker is a kind of a blasphemy. sent11: the Sculptor is not testicular if that the lotus-eater is both not testicular and not a radiocarbon is not true. sent12: if the flagship is not mutagenic then that the lotus-eater is not a radiocarbon and does monetize clarion is not right. sent13: the astatine is testicular if that the maker is not a blasphemy and not terminological is false. sent14: the astatine is not terminological but it is a kind of a blasphemy if the lotus-eater is testicular. sent15: something does not monetize clarion. sent16: if something does not monetize clarion then the fact that it is docile and is a radiocarbon is not true. sent17: the astatine does not monetize clarion. sent18: the Sculptor is not testicular if the lotus-eater is a radiocarbon. sent19: if something is not docile then it is not terminological. sent20: if something is not a radiocarbon then that it is not a blasphemy and it is not terminological is incorrect. sent21: if the Sculptor is not terminological the astatine does not monetize clarion. sent22: the maker is not a blasphemy if the fact that the astatine is a kind of non-terminological a blasphemy hold.
sent5 -> int1: that the Sculptor is a kind of docile thing that designs varnisher is not right if it is not testicular.; sent11 & sent6 -> int2: the Sculptor is not testicular.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the Sculptor is docile and does design varnisher is not correct.; sent1 -> int4: if the fact that the Sculptor is docile and designs varnisher does not hold then it is not terminological.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Sculptor is not terminological.;
the hooks is lean but it does not monetize clarion.
sent20 -> int6: if the maker is not a kind of a radiocarbon then the fact that it is not a blasphemy and is not terminological is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the maker is a blasphemy is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is docile and designs varnisher is not right then it is not terminological. sent2: the fact that the lotus-eater is testicular and a radiocarbon is not correct. sent3: something is terminological and it does monetize clarion. sent4: there is something such that it is terminological. sent5: if something is not testicular then that the fact that it is docile and it does design varnisher is true is not true. sent6: that that the lotus-eater is both testicular and not a radiocarbon is not true hold. sent7: the Sculptor is not terminological if it is not docile. sent8: if the fact that something is not a kind of a radiocarbon and does monetize clarion is false then it is testicular. sent9: if something that is terminological does not design varnisher the astatine is a kind of a radiocarbon. sent10: if something that is terminological does not monetize clarion then the maker is a kind of a blasphemy. sent11: the Sculptor is not testicular if that the lotus-eater is both not testicular and not a radiocarbon is not true. sent12: if the flagship is not mutagenic then that the lotus-eater is not a radiocarbon and does monetize clarion is not right. sent13: the astatine is testicular if that the maker is not a blasphemy and not terminological is false. sent14: the astatine is not terminological but it is a kind of a blasphemy if the lotus-eater is testicular. sent15: something does not monetize clarion. sent16: if something does not monetize clarion then the fact that it is docile and is a radiocarbon is not true. sent17: the astatine does not monetize clarion. sent18: the Sculptor is not testicular if the lotus-eater is a radiocarbon. sent19: if something is not docile then it is not terminological. sent20: if something is not a radiocarbon then that it is not a blasphemy and it is not terminological is incorrect. sent21: if the Sculptor is not terminological the astatine does not monetize clarion. sent22: the maker is not a blasphemy if the fact that the astatine is a kind of non-terminological a blasphemy hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: that the Sculptor is a kind of docile thing that designs varnisher is not right if it is not testicular.; sent11 & sent6 -> int2: the Sculptor is not testicular.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the Sculptor is docile and does design varnisher is not correct.; sent1 -> int4: if the fact that the Sculptor is docile and designs varnisher does not hold then it is not terminological.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Sculptor is not terminological.; __UNKNOWN__