the stonefish is a rest and does magnetize Volgaic.
sent1: that the rectus is not aptitudinal but it is wearable is not right. sent2: the rectus does stripe. sent3: if there exists something such that it magnetizes Volgaic the fact that that the rectus is not a Thompson but Gauguinesque hold is not correct. sent4: the rectus is hemodynamics. sent5: if something is a wish the fact that the rectus is not aptitudinal and it is unwearable is not true. sent6: if the fact that something is a holography hold that the constantan is non-aptitudinal thing that is wearable does not hold. sent7: something is a kind of a wish. sent8: the State does magnetize Volgaic and is a prudence. sent9: the stonefish is a Thompson. sent10: the crustacean is wearable and it is Quechuan. sent11: that the nozzle criticizes specialism but it is not cyclothymic does not hold. sent12: that the stonefish does not magnetize Volgaic is not right if the fact that the constantan is a holography and is not cyclothymic does not hold. sent13: the fact that the fact that the constantan is a canecutter and is not a holography is right is not correct. sent14: that the constantan is a kind of a holography and is not cyclothymic is not true if the rectus is Gauguinesque. sent15: if that something is not aptitudinal and not wearable is incorrect then it is Gauguinesque. sent16: if the stonefish is a kind of a Thompson it rests.
sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the rectus is not aptitudinal and is not wearable hold is not right.; sent15 -> int2: the rectus is Gauguinesque if the fact that it is both not aptitudinal and unwearable is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the rectus is not non-Gauguinesque.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: that the constantan is a kind of a holography but it is not cyclothymic does not hold.; int4 & sent12 -> int5: the stonefish magnetizes Volgaic.; sent16 & sent9 -> int6: the stonefish rests.; int5 & int6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the stonefish is a rest and does magnetize Volgaic. ; $context$ = sent1: that the rectus is not aptitudinal but it is wearable is not right. sent2: the rectus does stripe. sent3: if there exists something such that it magnetizes Volgaic the fact that that the rectus is not a Thompson but Gauguinesque hold is not correct. sent4: the rectus is hemodynamics. sent5: if something is a wish the fact that the rectus is not aptitudinal and it is unwearable is not true. sent6: if the fact that something is a holography hold that the constantan is non-aptitudinal thing that is wearable does not hold. sent7: something is a kind of a wish. sent8: the State does magnetize Volgaic and is a prudence. sent9: the stonefish is a Thompson. sent10: the crustacean is wearable and it is Quechuan. sent11: that the nozzle criticizes specialism but it is not cyclothymic does not hold. sent12: that the stonefish does not magnetize Volgaic is not right if the fact that the constantan is a holography and is not cyclothymic does not hold. sent13: the fact that the fact that the constantan is a canecutter and is not a holography is right is not correct. sent14: that the constantan is a kind of a holography and is not cyclothymic is not true if the rectus is Gauguinesque. sent15: if that something is not aptitudinal and not wearable is incorrect then it is Gauguinesque. sent16: if the stonefish is a kind of a Thompson it rests. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the rectus is not aptitudinal and is not wearable hold is not right.; sent15 -> int2: the rectus is Gauguinesque if the fact that it is both not aptitudinal and unwearable is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the rectus is not non-Gauguinesque.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: that the constantan is a kind of a holography but it is not cyclothymic does not hold.; int4 & sent12 -> int5: the stonefish magnetizes Volgaic.; sent16 & sent9 -> int6: the stonefish rests.; int5 & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__