there exists something such that if it is not rationalist then it does recombine thermal and it tweedles titfer.
sent1: something is a Lamarckism that is not non-sympatric if it does not abdicate Rhamnus. sent2: there is something such that if it is not rationalist it tweedles titfer. sent3: there is something such that if that it does not abdicate Rhamnus is true then it derives. sent4: there exists something such that if it is non-rationalist the fact that it does recombine thermal is not wrong. sent5: the thermal tweedles titfer and is a kind of an obituary if it is not a Delicious. sent6: there exists something such that if it is rationalist then it recombines thermal and it does tweedle titfer. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not abdicate Rhamnus then it is a entellus. sent8: if the sporophore does recombine thermal then it recombines wobbler and is a parer. sent9: there is something such that if it splutters welterweight it does abdicate legged and it is a kind of a Zizania. sent10: the sporophore is both an inexperienced and a Muharram if it does not recombine thermal. sent11: the sporophore does recombine thermal and it does bethink if the fact that it is a factor is not incorrect. sent12: if something is rationalist it does recombine thermal and tweedles titfer. sent13: if the sporophore is not a semicentennial then it is rationalist. sent14: the fact that if the sporophore does not recombine thermal then the sporophore is a Oort and it abdicates legged hold. sent15: if the Mohawk does not recombine thermal it is a Zizania. sent16: there is something such that if it is not philosophic then it does rag. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not bother the fact that it is both heuristic and an opportunity is correct. sent18: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a quirk then it is behavioral.
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not rationalist then it does recombine thermal and it tweedles titfer. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a Lamarckism that is not non-sympatric if it does not abdicate Rhamnus. sent2: there is something such that if it is not rationalist it tweedles titfer. sent3: there is something such that if that it does not abdicate Rhamnus is true then it derives. sent4: there exists something such that if it is non-rationalist the fact that it does recombine thermal is not wrong. sent5: the thermal tweedles titfer and is a kind of an obituary if it is not a Delicious. sent6: there exists something such that if it is rationalist then it recombines thermal and it does tweedle titfer. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not abdicate Rhamnus then it is a entellus. sent8: if the sporophore does recombine thermal then it recombines wobbler and is a parer. sent9: there is something such that if it splutters welterweight it does abdicate legged and it is a kind of a Zizania. sent10: the sporophore is both an inexperienced and a Muharram if it does not recombine thermal. sent11: the sporophore does recombine thermal and it does bethink if the fact that it is a factor is not incorrect. sent12: if something is rationalist it does recombine thermal and tweedles titfer. sent13: if the sporophore is not a semicentennial then it is rationalist. sent14: the fact that if the sporophore does not recombine thermal then the sporophore is a Oort and it abdicates legged hold. sent15: if the Mohawk does not recombine thermal it is a Zizania. sent16: there is something such that if it is not philosophic then it does rag. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not bother the fact that it is both heuristic and an opportunity is correct. sent18: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a quirk then it is behavioral. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__