the meeting does not philander Syngonium.
sent1: if something is non-botulinal then that it is not a kind of a Adenauer and does not philander choc-ice is false. sent2: if something that does not catapult impressiveness is botulinal then it flows. sent3: if the fact that the mortgagor does not philander choc-ice and does not catapult impressiveness does not hold then the ethmoid does not philander choc-ice. sent4: if the mortgagor is Bavarian then the tollkeeper is not spousal. sent5: something is exchangeable and it does catapult dummy. sent6: the fact that the tollkeeper is a kind of a grillroom and it is a flow is not true if that it is spousal is not correct. sent7: if the fact that something is a kind of a grillroom and it is a flow is incorrect then it is not a flow. sent8: the fact that the meeting is not spousal if the Fuji is a kind of a Bavarian is true. sent9: that the meeting flows hold. sent10: if the fact that something is not a Adenauer and does not philander choc-ice is not right then it does philander Syngonium. sent11: if the ethmoid does not catapult impressiveness then that the tollkeeper is botulinal and does flow is incorrect. sent12: something that is not a Adenauer and does not philander choc-ice is not a kind of a monogamy. sent13: something flows and it philanders Syngonium. sent14: that something does not philander choc-ice and it does not catapult impressiveness does not hold if it is not botulinal. sent15: the ethmoid is not botulinal. sent16: if the tollkeeper does philander Syngonium the meeting philander Syngonium. sent17: if the fact that that the ethmoid catapults impressiveness and is not a monogamy is not incorrect is not right then the meeting does not philander Syngonium. sent18: if a Adenauer does philander choc-ice then the tollkeeper is botulinal. sent19: the Fuji is a kind of a Adenauer that philanders choc-ice. sent20: there exists something such that it is spousal. sent21: if the meeting does not flow and does philander Syngonium then it is a grillroom. sent22: if the tollkeeper is a Adenauer then the Fuji is non-spousal. sent23: if the tollkeeper does catapult impressiveness then that the ethmoid catapult impressiveness and is not a kind of a monogamy is false. sent24: the tollkeeper philanders Syngonium and it is a Adenauer if the ethmoid does not philander choc-ice.
sent19 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a Adenauer and philanders choc-ice.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the tollkeeper is botulinal.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tollkeeper does not catapult impressiveness.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: the tollkeeper does not catapult impressiveness but it is botulinal.; sent2 -> int4: if the tollkeeper does not catapult impressiveness but it is botulinal then it flows.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the tollkeeper is a kind of a flow.; sent7 -> int6: if that the tollkeeper is a grillroom that flows is not true then it is not a kind of a flows.;
the meeting philanders Syngonium.
sent14 -> int7: if the mortgagor is not botulinal then the fact that it does not philander choc-ice and it does not catapult impressiveness is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the meeting does not philander Syngonium. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is non-botulinal then that it is not a kind of a Adenauer and does not philander choc-ice is false. sent2: if something that does not catapult impressiveness is botulinal then it flows. sent3: if the fact that the mortgagor does not philander choc-ice and does not catapult impressiveness does not hold then the ethmoid does not philander choc-ice. sent4: if the mortgagor is Bavarian then the tollkeeper is not spousal. sent5: something is exchangeable and it does catapult dummy. sent6: the fact that the tollkeeper is a kind of a grillroom and it is a flow is not true if that it is spousal is not correct. sent7: if the fact that something is a kind of a grillroom and it is a flow is incorrect then it is not a flow. sent8: the fact that the meeting is not spousal if the Fuji is a kind of a Bavarian is true. sent9: that the meeting flows hold. sent10: if the fact that something is not a Adenauer and does not philander choc-ice is not right then it does philander Syngonium. sent11: if the ethmoid does not catapult impressiveness then that the tollkeeper is botulinal and does flow is incorrect. sent12: something that is not a Adenauer and does not philander choc-ice is not a kind of a monogamy. sent13: something flows and it philanders Syngonium. sent14: that something does not philander choc-ice and it does not catapult impressiveness does not hold if it is not botulinal. sent15: the ethmoid is not botulinal. sent16: if the tollkeeper does philander Syngonium the meeting philander Syngonium. sent17: if the fact that that the ethmoid catapults impressiveness and is not a monogamy is not incorrect is not right then the meeting does not philander Syngonium. sent18: if a Adenauer does philander choc-ice then the tollkeeper is botulinal. sent19: the Fuji is a kind of a Adenauer that philanders choc-ice. sent20: there exists something such that it is spousal. sent21: if the meeting does not flow and does philander Syngonium then it is a grillroom. sent22: if the tollkeeper is a Adenauer then the Fuji is non-spousal. sent23: if the tollkeeper does catapult impressiveness then that the ethmoid catapult impressiveness and is not a kind of a monogamy is false. sent24: the tollkeeper philanders Syngonium and it is a Adenauer if the ethmoid does not philander choc-ice. ; $proof$ = 
sent19 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a Adenauer and philanders choc-ice.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the tollkeeper is botulinal.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tollkeeper does not catapult impressiveness.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: the tollkeeper does not catapult impressiveness but it is botulinal.; sent2 -> int4: if the tollkeeper does not catapult impressiveness but it is botulinal then it flows.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the tollkeeper is a kind of a flow.; sent7 -> int6: if that the tollkeeper is a grillroom that flows is not true then it is not a kind of a flows.; __UNKNOWN__