the Father is not serious but it is unpretentious.
sent1: that the Father is linear and it is serious is incorrect. sent2: if the hotel is unpretentious the fact that the Father is unpretentious thing that is linear is not right. sent3: the hotel is not a portrait but it is linear if there exists something such that it horripilates demantoid. sent4: that the hotel is not a portrait and reposits windstorm is wrong. sent5: if the follower is a portrait then the fact that the hotel is not a portrait and is linear is wrong. sent6: the follower is a portrait if the garrote is legless. sent7: something is serious if the fact that it is a kind of a portrait that does not reposit windstorm is not correct. sent8: the fact that if the fact that something horripilates demantoid and is not a portrait is false then it is medicolegal hold. sent9: if the fact that something is medicolegal and does not reposit windstorm is not true it is a kind of a myofibril. sent10: the ferrocerium does horripilate demantoid. sent11: if the fact that the Father is not serious but it is unpretentious is not true that the indene does reposit windstorm is not incorrect. sent12: if the toenail is a myofibril the garrote is legless. sent13: The demantoid does horripilate ferrocerium. sent14: the hotel does not reposit windstorm and is linear. sent15: if that the garrote does not reposit windstorm but it is unpretentious is incorrect the Father is legless. sent16: the fact that the toenail is medicolegal but it does not reposit windstorm is not true if the indene does reposit windstorm. sent17: that the hotel is legless is true if the garrote is a portrait. sent18: that if the fact that the follower is legless and is not the myofibril is false then that the follower is a portrait is not incorrect is not incorrect. sent19: the follower is not linear. sent20: the fact that the ferrocerium is a portrait hold if the fact that the hotel does horripilate demantoid is right. sent21: that if the indene is serious then that the Father is serious and does reposit windstorm does not hold is right. sent22: if the hotel is linear that the garrote is linear and it is legless is not correct. sent23: the Father horripilates demantoid if the ferrocerium is unpretentious. sent24: that the Father is a Traubel hold. sent25: the follower is serious. sent26: the ferrocerium is legless. sent27: the fact that the toenail is a portrait but it does not reposit windstorm is not right if the hotel does reposit windstorm. sent28: the toenail is not a portrait and is yogistic. sent29: the Father does not reposit windstorm but it is unpretentious.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the Father is a kind of non-serious thing that is unpretentious is incorrect.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the indene reposits windstorm.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: that the toenail is medicolegal thing that does not reposit windstorm is not correct.; sent9 -> int3: the toenail is a myofibril if the fact that it is medicolegal and it does not reposit windstorm is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the toenail is a myofibril.; int4 & sent12 -> int5: the garrote is legless.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the follower is a portrait.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the fact that the hotel is not a portrait but linear is wrong.; sent10 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it does horripilate demantoid is correct.; int8 & sent3 -> int9: the hotel is not a portrait but it is linear.; int7 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the Father is not serious but it is unpretentious. ; $context$ = sent1: that the Father is linear and it is serious is incorrect. sent2: if the hotel is unpretentious the fact that the Father is unpretentious thing that is linear is not right. sent3: the hotel is not a portrait but it is linear if there exists something such that it horripilates demantoid. sent4: that the hotel is not a portrait and reposits windstorm is wrong. sent5: if the follower is a portrait then the fact that the hotel is not a portrait and is linear is wrong. sent6: the follower is a portrait if the garrote is legless. sent7: something is serious if the fact that it is a kind of a portrait that does not reposit windstorm is not correct. sent8: the fact that if the fact that something horripilates demantoid and is not a portrait is false then it is medicolegal hold. sent9: if the fact that something is medicolegal and does not reposit windstorm is not true it is a kind of a myofibril. sent10: the ferrocerium does horripilate demantoid. sent11: if the fact that the Father is not serious but it is unpretentious is not true that the indene does reposit windstorm is not incorrect. sent12: if the toenail is a myofibril the garrote is legless. sent13: The demantoid does horripilate ferrocerium. sent14: the hotel does not reposit windstorm and is linear. sent15: if that the garrote does not reposit windstorm but it is unpretentious is incorrect the Father is legless. sent16: the fact that the toenail is medicolegal but it does not reposit windstorm is not true if the indene does reposit windstorm. sent17: that the hotel is legless is true if the garrote is a portrait. sent18: that if the fact that the follower is legless and is not the myofibril is false then that the follower is a portrait is not incorrect is not incorrect. sent19: the follower is not linear. sent20: the fact that the ferrocerium is a portrait hold if the fact that the hotel does horripilate demantoid is right. sent21: that if the indene is serious then that the Father is serious and does reposit windstorm does not hold is right. sent22: if the hotel is linear that the garrote is linear and it is legless is not correct. sent23: the Father horripilates demantoid if the ferrocerium is unpretentious. sent24: that the Father is a Traubel hold. sent25: the follower is serious. sent26: the ferrocerium is legless. sent27: the fact that the toenail is a portrait but it does not reposit windstorm is not right if the hotel does reposit windstorm. sent28: the toenail is not a portrait and is yogistic. sent29: the Father does not reposit windstorm but it is unpretentious. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the Father is a kind of non-serious thing that is unpretentious is incorrect.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the indene reposits windstorm.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: that the toenail is medicolegal thing that does not reposit windstorm is not correct.; sent9 -> int3: the toenail is a myofibril if the fact that it is medicolegal and it does not reposit windstorm is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the toenail is a myofibril.; int4 & sent12 -> int5: the garrote is legless.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the follower is a portrait.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the fact that the hotel is not a portrait but linear is wrong.; sent10 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it does horripilate demantoid is correct.; int8 & sent3 -> int9: the hotel is not a portrait but it is linear.; int7 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__