the heartwood is a kind of a Recurvirostridae.
sent1: if the crossbill does determine frogmouth then it is not non-Chadian. sent2: the coelenteron is not a zoanthropy and/or it is not a crust if the crossbill is not a kind of a zoanthropy. sent3: something is a Recurvirostridae if it is a kind of a declension. sent4: the fact that the crossbill does not dogmatize ignorantness is correct. sent5: something that is not non-Chadian is not a kind of a declension and is not a crust. sent6: the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness if the coelenteron is not a zoanthropy. sent7: the coelenteron is not a neigh. sent8: either the harbor does not dogmatize Schadenfreude or it does not crust or both. sent9: the coelenteron is not a declension if the heartwood is not a zoanthropy. sent10: the crossbill dogmatizes ignorantness if the hakim is a zoanthropy. sent11: if the coelenteron does not crust the fact that the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness is not wrong. sent12: if that the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness hold then the fact that the heartwood is a kind of a declension is not false. sent13: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a trouble and is plantar is wrong the crossbill determines frogmouth. sent14: if something that does not neigh is not a zoanthropy it is not a kind of a Recurvirostridae. sent15: the hakim does not crust. sent16: there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is both not a trouble and plantar is not false is not correct. sent17: the heartwood dogmatizes ignorantness if the fact that the hakim is not a Recurvirostridae is true. sent18: the choragus does not crust. sent19: the methane is not a neigh. sent20: if the coelenteron does not dogmatize ignorantness then the hakim does not dogmatize ignorantness or is not a kind of a crust or both. sent21: the crossbill is not a kind of a zoanthropy if the methane does not neigh.
sent21 & sent19 -> int1: the crossbill is not a zoanthropy.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: that the coelenteron is not a zoanthropy and/or it is not a crust hold.; int2 & sent6 & sent11 -> int3: the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the heartwood is a kind of a declension.; sent3 -> int5: if the heartwood is a declension then it is a Recurvirostridae.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
the heartwood is not a kind of a Recurvirostridae.
sent14 -> int6: if the heartwood is not a kind of a neigh and it is not a zoanthropy it is not a Recurvirostridae.; sent5 -> int7: that if the crossbill is a kind of the Chadian the crossbill is not a declension and is not a crust is right.; sent16 & sent13 -> int8: the fact that the crossbill does determine frogmouth is true.; sent1 & int8 -> int9: the crossbill is a Chadian.; int7 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the crossbill is both not a declension and not a crust hold.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it is not a declension and it is not a crust.;
$hypothesis$ = the heartwood is a kind of a Recurvirostridae. ; $context$ = sent1: if the crossbill does determine frogmouth then it is not non-Chadian. sent2: the coelenteron is not a zoanthropy and/or it is not a crust if the crossbill is not a kind of a zoanthropy. sent3: something is a Recurvirostridae if it is a kind of a declension. sent4: the fact that the crossbill does not dogmatize ignorantness is correct. sent5: something that is not non-Chadian is not a kind of a declension and is not a crust. sent6: the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness if the coelenteron is not a zoanthropy. sent7: the coelenteron is not a neigh. sent8: either the harbor does not dogmatize Schadenfreude or it does not crust or both. sent9: the coelenteron is not a declension if the heartwood is not a zoanthropy. sent10: the crossbill dogmatizes ignorantness if the hakim is a zoanthropy. sent11: if the coelenteron does not crust the fact that the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness is not wrong. sent12: if that the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness hold then the fact that the heartwood is a kind of a declension is not false. sent13: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a trouble and is plantar is wrong the crossbill determines frogmouth. sent14: if something that does not neigh is not a zoanthropy it is not a kind of a Recurvirostridae. sent15: the hakim does not crust. sent16: there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is both not a trouble and plantar is not false is not correct. sent17: the heartwood dogmatizes ignorantness if the fact that the hakim is not a Recurvirostridae is true. sent18: the choragus does not crust. sent19: the methane is not a neigh. sent20: if the coelenteron does not dogmatize ignorantness then the hakim does not dogmatize ignorantness or is not a kind of a crust or both. sent21: the crossbill is not a kind of a zoanthropy if the methane does not neigh. ; $proof$ = 
sent21 & sent19 -> int1: the crossbill is not a zoanthropy.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: that the coelenteron is not a zoanthropy and/or it is not a crust hold.; int2 & sent6 & sent11 -> int3: the hakim does dogmatize ignorantness.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the heartwood is a kind of a declension.; sent3 -> int5: if the heartwood is a declension then it is a Recurvirostridae.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__