the padlock is a martyrdom.
sent1: if something is a penciled then the fact that the rhinencephalon is not disintegrative and is a kind of a celeriac does not hold. sent2: the waterproof is noncombustible if that the padlock is both arthromeric and not a martyrdom is incorrect. sent3: the rathskeller does not pencil but it is a kind of a mashie. sent4: if the fact that the rhinencephalon is not disintegrative but it is a kind of a celeriac is not correct the waterproof is not arthromeric. sent5: the corm does pencil if it is non-interdisciplinary and it is noncombustible. sent6: the corm is not interdisciplinary. sent7: if the rhinencephalon is disintegrative then that the waterproof is arthromeric is not correct. sent8: if the corm is not arthromeric then the waterproof is noncombustible. sent9: the corm is a kind of a spicemill. sent10: the fact that the rathskeller is arthromeric is correct. sent11: the padlock is not disintegrative. sent12: if the fact that the rathskeller is a mashie and not subsequent is not correct then the corm is noncombustible. sent13: the corm is a mashie. sent14: the Gael is disintegrative. sent15: the corm is interdisciplinary if the rhinencephalon is not interdisciplinary. sent16: the rathskeller is a celeriac and it is a kind of a skier. sent17: the fact that the corm is both not a penciled and a celeriac is not true. sent18: the balloonist is not a kind of a celeriac. sent19: the padlock is a mashie. sent20: if the waterproof is not arthromeric the padlock is both arthromeric and a martyrdom. sent21: the fact that the rathskeller is a kind of interdisciplinary thing that is not a mashie is incorrect. sent22: that the rathskeller is a mashie that is not subsequent is false. sent23: that the padlock is a kind of non-interdisciplinary thing that is arthromeric does not hold. sent24: the waterproof is a kind of a mashie. sent25: that the rathskeller is both non-interdisciplinary and a penciled is incorrect if there exists something such that it is subsequent.
sent12 & sent22 -> int1: the corm is noncombustible.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the corm is not interdisciplinary but it is noncombustible.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the corm is a penciled.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it is a kind of a penciled.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the fact that the fact that the rhinencephalon is non-disintegrative but it is a kind of a celeriac is correct is false.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the waterproof is not arthromeric.; int6 & sent20 -> int7: the padlock is arthromeric and is a kind of a martyrdom.; int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the padlock is a martyrdom. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a penciled then the fact that the rhinencephalon is not disintegrative and is a kind of a celeriac does not hold. sent2: the waterproof is noncombustible if that the padlock is both arthromeric and not a martyrdom is incorrect. sent3: the rathskeller does not pencil but it is a kind of a mashie. sent4: if the fact that the rhinencephalon is not disintegrative but it is a kind of a celeriac is not correct the waterproof is not arthromeric. sent5: the corm does pencil if it is non-interdisciplinary and it is noncombustible. sent6: the corm is not interdisciplinary. sent7: if the rhinencephalon is disintegrative then that the waterproof is arthromeric is not correct. sent8: if the corm is not arthromeric then the waterproof is noncombustible. sent9: the corm is a kind of a spicemill. sent10: the fact that the rathskeller is arthromeric is correct. sent11: the padlock is not disintegrative. sent12: if the fact that the rathskeller is a mashie and not subsequent is not correct then the corm is noncombustible. sent13: the corm is a mashie. sent14: the Gael is disintegrative. sent15: the corm is interdisciplinary if the rhinencephalon is not interdisciplinary. sent16: the rathskeller is a celeriac and it is a kind of a skier. sent17: the fact that the corm is both not a penciled and a celeriac is not true. sent18: the balloonist is not a kind of a celeriac. sent19: the padlock is a mashie. sent20: if the waterproof is not arthromeric the padlock is both arthromeric and a martyrdom. sent21: the fact that the rathskeller is a kind of interdisciplinary thing that is not a mashie is incorrect. sent22: that the rathskeller is a mashie that is not subsequent is false. sent23: that the padlock is a kind of non-interdisciplinary thing that is arthromeric does not hold. sent24: the waterproof is a kind of a mashie. sent25: that the rathskeller is both non-interdisciplinary and a penciled is incorrect if there exists something such that it is subsequent. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent22 -> int1: the corm is noncombustible.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the corm is not interdisciplinary but it is noncombustible.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the corm is a penciled.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it is a kind of a penciled.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the fact that the fact that the rhinencephalon is non-disintegrative but it is a kind of a celeriac is correct is false.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the waterproof is not arthromeric.; int6 & sent20 -> int7: the padlock is arthromeric and is a kind of a martyrdom.; int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__