the fact that the proliferation is a saunter is not incorrect.
sent1: if the fact that the infusorian is anticoagulative but it does not mean counterrevolution is wrong then the squib does not mean commiseration. sent2: the fact that the squib is a kind of expendable thing that does not mean commiseration does not hold. sent3: if the bull is a tapa and is not anuretic then the infusorian is a silage. sent4: if the bull is not a belligerence that the squib is a kind of a belligerence but it is not expendable is not true. sent5: the fact that if the fact that the squib is expendable and does not mean commiseration is not correct then the squib is not expendable is true. sent6: if the fact that something is a belligerence and is a saunter is incorrect it is not a saunter. sent7: if that the infusorian is a kind of a silage that does not mean commiseration does not hold it is not a silage. sent8: the lost-and-found does mean ox and it is a polybutylene. sent9: if something does not mean commiseration then the fact that it is a kind of a silage and it is diatomic does not hold. sent10: if the rangeland does not gong automat then that the infusorian is a kind of anticoagulative thing that does not mean counterrevolution is wrong. sent11: the infusorian is not diatomic or it is not a kind of a silage or both. sent12: if the leptocephalus is not a symphysion and it does not mean Virginian the lost-and-found does not torture Phyllostomus. sent13: the proliferation is a belligerence if the squib is a belligerence. sent14: if the lost-and-found does not gong automat the rangeland does not gong automat. sent15: something does not gong automat if it is not a Alsophila and it is a checksum. sent16: something is Aberdonian and it is a Stoker if it does not torture Phyllostomus. sent17: if that the squib is both a silage and diatomic does not hold the proliferation is not expendable. sent18: that something is a kind of a belligerence that is a kind of a saunter is wrong if that it is not expendable is not false. sent19: if something that does mean ox is Aberdonian then it does not mean Oujda. sent20: if the infusorian is a silage the proliferation is a saunter. sent21: the fact that something is a chromium and not anticoagulative does not hold if it is expendable. sent22: the squib is diatomic. sent23: the squib is a belligerence if it is diatomic. sent24: the fact that something is not a Alsophila and is a kind of a checksum is right if it does not mean Oujda.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the bull is a tapa and non-anuretic is not right.; sent23 & sent22 -> int1: the squib is a kind of a belligerence.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: the squib is not expendable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the squib is a belligerence but it is not expendable.;
that the proliferation is a chromium but it is not anticoagulative does not hold.
sent21 -> int4: if the proliferation is expendable that it is a kind of a chromium and it is not anticoagulative is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the proliferation is a saunter is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the infusorian is anticoagulative but it does not mean counterrevolution is wrong then the squib does not mean commiseration. sent2: the fact that the squib is a kind of expendable thing that does not mean commiseration does not hold. sent3: if the bull is a tapa and is not anuretic then the infusorian is a silage. sent4: if the bull is not a belligerence that the squib is a kind of a belligerence but it is not expendable is not true. sent5: the fact that if the fact that the squib is expendable and does not mean commiseration is not correct then the squib is not expendable is true. sent6: if the fact that something is a belligerence and is a saunter is incorrect it is not a saunter. sent7: if that the infusorian is a kind of a silage that does not mean commiseration does not hold it is not a silage. sent8: the lost-and-found does mean ox and it is a polybutylene. sent9: if something does not mean commiseration then the fact that it is a kind of a silage and it is diatomic does not hold. sent10: if the rangeland does not gong automat then that the infusorian is a kind of anticoagulative thing that does not mean counterrevolution is wrong. sent11: the infusorian is not diatomic or it is not a kind of a silage or both. sent12: if the leptocephalus is not a symphysion and it does not mean Virginian the lost-and-found does not torture Phyllostomus. sent13: the proliferation is a belligerence if the squib is a belligerence. sent14: if the lost-and-found does not gong automat the rangeland does not gong automat. sent15: something does not gong automat if it is not a Alsophila and it is a checksum. sent16: something is Aberdonian and it is a Stoker if it does not torture Phyllostomus. sent17: if that the squib is both a silage and diatomic does not hold the proliferation is not expendable. sent18: that something is a kind of a belligerence that is a kind of a saunter is wrong if that it is not expendable is not false. sent19: if something that does mean ox is Aberdonian then it does not mean Oujda. sent20: if the infusorian is a silage the proliferation is a saunter. sent21: the fact that something is a chromium and not anticoagulative does not hold if it is expendable. sent22: the squib is diatomic. sent23: the squib is a belligerence if it is diatomic. sent24: the fact that something is not a Alsophila and is a kind of a checksum is right if it does not mean Oujda. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the bull is a tapa and non-anuretic is not right.; sent23 & sent22 -> int1: the squib is a kind of a belligerence.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: the squib is not expendable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the squib is a belligerence but it is not expendable.; __UNKNOWN__