that the premolar is not a mounter hold.
sent1: the pot does aurify yacht if the fact that the kingbird is a kind of a Hygrophorus but it is not monumental is not right. sent2: if the cinnamon is not a prospectus then the premolar is not a mounter. sent3: the fact that the end is both not monumental and not a Hygrophorus is not right if it is hermeneutics. sent4: the end aurifies physa if the pot aurifies yacht. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is a Hygrophorus and it is not tolerable is not correct. sent6: the premolar is a mounter if the spacewalker is a Hygrophorus. sent7: if the fact that the end is non-hermeneutics and not Parthian is not right then the cinnamon is not a prospectus. sent8: the fact that something is non-hermeneutics thing that is a Parthian is incorrect if it aurifies physa. sent9: the spacewalker is a kind of a Parthian if the end is a kind of a Hygrophorus. sent10: the spacewalker is not a kind of a Hygrophorus if there exists something such that the fact that it is not tolerable but non-monochromatic is not correct. sent11: the fact that the hart is a kind of monochromatic thing that does not aurify physa is not correct if it is hermeneutics. sent12: the kingbird is not monumental if there exists something such that either it is not monumental or it aurifies yacht or both. sent13: the pot aurifies yacht if the kingbird is monumental. sent14: the hart is monumental if that the kingbird is monochromatic thing that does not aurify physa is not correct. sent15: there exists something such that the fact that it is non-tolerable thing that is monochromatic is wrong. sent16: if the end does aurify physa then that it is not non-hermeneutics and not a Parthian is false. sent17: the fact that the hart is not tolerable and it is non-monochromatic is not true. sent18: that the end is hermeneutics and is not a Parthian is not correct. sent19: that the kingbird is a Hygrophorus but it is not monumental is not true if the spacewalker is not a kind of a Hygrophorus. sent20: that the hart is monochromatic and is a mounter is incorrect if the premolar is not monochromatic. sent21: that the hart is not monochromatic and it is not a kind of a Parthian does not hold. sent22: the fact that the premolar is a mounter that is not a Hygrophorus does not hold. sent23: that something is not hermeneutics and it is not a kind of a Parthian is not correct if it aurifies physa. sent24: if the end is not Parthian the pot is not monumental and/or it aurifies yacht. sent25: the fact that the pot is a prospectus but it does not aurify yacht is incorrect if the cinnamon is not a kind of a prospectus. sent26: there is something such that the fact that it aurifies yacht and is not a Parthian is incorrect.
sent17 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not tolerable and is not monochromatic is incorrect.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the spacewalker is not a Hygrophorus.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: that the kingbird is both a Hygrophorus and not monumental does not hold.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the pot aurifies yacht.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the end aurifies physa.; sent23 -> int6: if the end aurifies physa that it is not hermeneutics and it is non-Parthian is not correct.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the end is both not hermeneutics and not Parthian is not correct.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the cinnamon is not a prospectus.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the premolar is a kind of a mounter.
$hypothesis$ = that the premolar is not a mounter hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the pot does aurify yacht if the fact that the kingbird is a kind of a Hygrophorus but it is not monumental is not right. sent2: if the cinnamon is not a prospectus then the premolar is not a mounter. sent3: the fact that the end is both not monumental and not a Hygrophorus is not right if it is hermeneutics. sent4: the end aurifies physa if the pot aurifies yacht. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is a Hygrophorus and it is not tolerable is not correct. sent6: the premolar is a mounter if the spacewalker is a Hygrophorus. sent7: if the fact that the end is non-hermeneutics and not Parthian is not right then the cinnamon is not a prospectus. sent8: the fact that something is non-hermeneutics thing that is a Parthian is incorrect if it aurifies physa. sent9: the spacewalker is a kind of a Parthian if the end is a kind of a Hygrophorus. sent10: the spacewalker is not a kind of a Hygrophorus if there exists something such that the fact that it is not tolerable but non-monochromatic is not correct. sent11: the fact that the hart is a kind of monochromatic thing that does not aurify physa is not correct if it is hermeneutics. sent12: the kingbird is not monumental if there exists something such that either it is not monumental or it aurifies yacht or both. sent13: the pot aurifies yacht if the kingbird is monumental. sent14: the hart is monumental if that the kingbird is monochromatic thing that does not aurify physa is not correct. sent15: there exists something such that the fact that it is non-tolerable thing that is monochromatic is wrong. sent16: if the end does aurify physa then that it is not non-hermeneutics and not a Parthian is false. sent17: the fact that the hart is not tolerable and it is non-monochromatic is not true. sent18: that the end is hermeneutics and is not a Parthian is not correct. sent19: that the kingbird is a Hygrophorus but it is not monumental is not true if the spacewalker is not a kind of a Hygrophorus. sent20: that the hart is monochromatic and is a mounter is incorrect if the premolar is not monochromatic. sent21: that the hart is not monochromatic and it is not a kind of a Parthian does not hold. sent22: the fact that the premolar is a mounter that is not a Hygrophorus does not hold. sent23: that something is not hermeneutics and it is not a kind of a Parthian is not correct if it aurifies physa. sent24: if the end is not Parthian the pot is not monumental and/or it aurifies yacht. sent25: the fact that the pot is a prospectus but it does not aurify yacht is incorrect if the cinnamon is not a kind of a prospectus. sent26: there is something such that the fact that it aurifies yacht and is not a Parthian is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not tolerable and is not monochromatic is incorrect.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the spacewalker is not a Hygrophorus.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: that the kingbird is both a Hygrophorus and not monumental does not hold.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the pot aurifies yacht.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the end aurifies physa.; sent23 -> int6: if the end aurifies physa that it is not hermeneutics and it is non-Parthian is not correct.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the end is both not hermeneutics and not Parthian is not correct.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the cinnamon is not a prospectus.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__