the fact that the nucleus is not unexpendable but it is a teff does not hold.
sent1: the fornication is not a statics. sent2: the alarmist is a province if the transferase is a province. sent3: if the fornication does not garner lotto then that the nucleus is a kind of expendable a teff does not hold. sent4: the nucleus is a fomentation. sent5: the nucleus is not unexpendable. sent6: if the foliation is not a kind of a statics but it is a machismo then the fornication does not garner lotto. sent7: that the foliation is not unusual hold if the alarmist is a kind of unusual thing that denies frankness. sent8: the nucleus is a Malthus and it is unusual. sent9: if the fornication is a machismo and is not unusual it is not a statics. sent10: if the fact that something is not unexpendable but it is a teff does not hold then it is a kind of a statics. sent11: if the alarmist is a tapestry that it is not fissile is wrong. sent12: if the fact that the transferase is not a kind of a province and it is not bituminoid is false then it is a province. sent13: the nucleus does garner lotto if it is unusual. sent14: something is a kind of non-unusual a Malthus if it is fissile. sent15: the fact that that the fornication is not fiber-optic and does garner redhead is false is right. sent16: that the alarmist is not a tapestry is not true if the viceroy is both not a tapestry and a dispute. sent17: the viceroy is not a kind of a tapestry but it is a dispute. sent18: if there exists something such that it is a statics and does garner lotto then that the fact that the fornication is a kind of a machismo hold is false. sent19: if something is a kind of a machismo it is unusual. sent20: the pantile is not a e-commerce but it is unexpendable. sent21: the fornication is a machismo. sent22: if something is a province it does deny frankness.
sent10 -> int1: the nucleus is a statics if that it is both not unexpendable and a teff does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the nucleus is a kind of expendable thing that is a teff is not true.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the nucleus is statics.; sent8 -> int3: the nucleus is unusual.; sent13 & int3 -> int4: the nucleus does garner lotto.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the nucleus is statics and does garner lotto.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a statics and it garners lotto hold.; int6 & sent18 -> int7: the fornication is not a machismo.; int7 & sent21 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
the coltsfoot is unexpendable.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the nucleus is not unexpendable but it is a teff does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fornication is not a statics. sent2: the alarmist is a province if the transferase is a province. sent3: if the fornication does not garner lotto then that the nucleus is a kind of expendable a teff does not hold. sent4: the nucleus is a fomentation. sent5: the nucleus is not unexpendable. sent6: if the foliation is not a kind of a statics but it is a machismo then the fornication does not garner lotto. sent7: that the foliation is not unusual hold if the alarmist is a kind of unusual thing that denies frankness. sent8: the nucleus is a Malthus and it is unusual. sent9: if the fornication is a machismo and is not unusual it is not a statics. sent10: if the fact that something is not unexpendable but it is a teff does not hold then it is a kind of a statics. sent11: if the alarmist is a tapestry that it is not fissile is wrong. sent12: if the fact that the transferase is not a kind of a province and it is not bituminoid is false then it is a province. sent13: the nucleus does garner lotto if it is unusual. sent14: something is a kind of non-unusual a Malthus if it is fissile. sent15: the fact that that the fornication is not fiber-optic and does garner redhead is false is right. sent16: that the alarmist is not a tapestry is not true if the viceroy is both not a tapestry and a dispute. sent17: the viceroy is not a kind of a tapestry but it is a dispute. sent18: if there exists something such that it is a statics and does garner lotto then that the fact that the fornication is a kind of a machismo hold is false. sent19: if something is a kind of a machismo it is unusual. sent20: the pantile is not a e-commerce but it is unexpendable. sent21: the fornication is a machismo. sent22: if something is a province it does deny frankness. ; $proof$ = 
sent10 -> int1: the nucleus is a statics if that it is both not unexpendable and a teff does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the nucleus is a kind of expendable thing that is a teff is not true.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the nucleus is statics.; sent8 -> int3: the nucleus is unusual.; sent13 & int3 -> int4: the nucleus does garner lotto.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the nucleus is statics and does garner lotto.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a statics and it garners lotto hold.; int6 & sent18 -> int7: the fornication is not a machismo.; int7 & sent21 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__