the cowlick is a Triangulum but it is not testimonial.
sent1: if the arsenate is not exegetic then the fact that the lectern is a semaphore and is not fictile is incorrect. sent2: that the cowlick is a kind of a Triangulum that is not testimonial is false if the lectern is not testimonial. sent3: if the fact that the rectum is not non-oleaceous but a epaulet is incorrect the arsenate is not non-oleaceous. sent4: if the arsenate is oleaceous the lectern dreams mica. sent5: the fact that the rectum is a epaulet is not false. sent6: if something is a kind of cubist thing that is not doubling it is not a epaulet. sent7: if the fact that the rectum does not dream mica is not incorrect that it is exegetic and it is not oleaceous is not correct. sent8: if the maharaja is a Triangulum and testimonial then the cowlick does not dream mica. sent9: that if the fact that the arsenate is a Triangulum is correct then the cowlick is exegetic hold. sent10: if the cowlick is not a epaulet and does not dream mica the rectum does not dream mica. sent11: everything is a Triangulum and it is a pantaloon. sent12: the arsenate either is exegetic or is oleaceous or both. sent13: if something does not dream mica then that it is both not oleaceous and exegetic does not hold. sent14: if something is not exegetic then it is both a Triangulum and not testimonial. sent15: if the maharaja is not a pantaloon that either the lectern does not smite nontricyclic or it doubles or both is wrong. sent16: the lectern does dream mica if the arsenate is exegetic. sent17: if the administrator does not smite nontricyclic then the cowlick is a cubist but it is not doubling. sent18: the arsenate is oleaceous if the rectum is exegetic. sent19: the lectern is a epaulet if the fact that it does not smite nontricyclic or it does double or both is incorrect. sent20: the fact that the administrator does not smite nontricyclic is true. sent21: there exists nothing such that it is non-exegetic thing that dreams mica. sent22: if the rectum does dream mica and is a cubist then the arsenate does not dream mica. sent23: the rectum is not a epaulet if the lectern dreams mica and it is testimonial. sent24: if the fact that the administrator is a Jordanian and not a pantaloon is right the maharaja is not a pantaloon.
sent12 & sent16 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the lectern does dream mica hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the lectern is testimonial hold.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lectern dreams mica and is testimonial.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the rectum is not a epaulet.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the lectern is not testimonial.; int5 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the cowlick is a kind of a Triangulum but it is not testimonial.
$hypothesis$ = the cowlick is a Triangulum but it is not testimonial. ; $context$ = sent1: if the arsenate is not exegetic then the fact that the lectern is a semaphore and is not fictile is incorrect. sent2: that the cowlick is a kind of a Triangulum that is not testimonial is false if the lectern is not testimonial. sent3: if the fact that the rectum is not non-oleaceous but a epaulet is incorrect the arsenate is not non-oleaceous. sent4: if the arsenate is oleaceous the lectern dreams mica. sent5: the fact that the rectum is a epaulet is not false. sent6: if something is a kind of cubist thing that is not doubling it is not a epaulet. sent7: if the fact that the rectum does not dream mica is not incorrect that it is exegetic and it is not oleaceous is not correct. sent8: if the maharaja is a Triangulum and testimonial then the cowlick does not dream mica. sent9: that if the fact that the arsenate is a Triangulum is correct then the cowlick is exegetic hold. sent10: if the cowlick is not a epaulet and does not dream mica the rectum does not dream mica. sent11: everything is a Triangulum and it is a pantaloon. sent12: the arsenate either is exegetic or is oleaceous or both. sent13: if something does not dream mica then that it is both not oleaceous and exegetic does not hold. sent14: if something is not exegetic then it is both a Triangulum and not testimonial. sent15: if the maharaja is not a pantaloon that either the lectern does not smite nontricyclic or it doubles or both is wrong. sent16: the lectern does dream mica if the arsenate is exegetic. sent17: if the administrator does not smite nontricyclic then the cowlick is a cubist but it is not doubling. sent18: the arsenate is oleaceous if the rectum is exegetic. sent19: the lectern is a epaulet if the fact that it does not smite nontricyclic or it does double or both is incorrect. sent20: the fact that the administrator does not smite nontricyclic is true. sent21: there exists nothing such that it is non-exegetic thing that dreams mica. sent22: if the rectum does dream mica and is a cubist then the arsenate does not dream mica. sent23: the rectum is not a epaulet if the lectern dreams mica and it is testimonial. sent24: if the fact that the administrator is a Jordanian and not a pantaloon is right the maharaja is not a pantaloon. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent16 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the lectern does dream mica hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the lectern is testimonial hold.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lectern dreams mica and is testimonial.; int2 & sent23 -> int3: the rectum is not a epaulet.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the lectern is not testimonial.; int5 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__