there is something such that if it does not nick then it is not epicarpal and it is not integrative.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a sinker it is a kind of non-vicennial thing that is a kind of a Nancere. sent2: there is something such that if it does not nick then it is not epicarpal and it is integrative. sent3: the fact that there exists something such that if it does not pace it does not foxhunt and is diagnostic is not false. sent4: if something does flabbergast chandelier it is not a cusp and does not flabbergast trunk. sent5: there is something such that if that it does not displease is true then it is not a maneuverer and it is a manana. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not epistemic then it is not a kind of a ethnarch and is fractional. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not affine it is not distributive. sent8: there exists something such that if it nicks it is both non-epicarpal and disintegrative. sent9: if the nasturtium is not a kind of a nick then it is not integrative. sent10: if something is not a kind of a foam it is not a quasar and it is not a kind of an ebb. sent11: that if something does launch Abkhazian then it is not a kind of a presupposition and is not a molehill hold. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a nick it is not integrative. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a tableau it does not quieten and does not collect carful. sent14: if the hatchway is not a liberal then the fact that it is a bicarbonate and it is not starless hold. sent15: that the nasturtium is epicarpal but it is not integrative hold if that it is not a kind of a nick is true. sent16: the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a nick it is not epicarpal is correct. sent17: the nasturtium is a kind of epicarpal thing that is not indivisible if it is not a lights-out. sent18: if the fact that the nasturtium is bodily is right it is not a vulcanite and does not nick. sent19: if the nasturtium does not nick it does not launch Abkhazian and is not calcitic. sent20: something that is not a clear is not cytogenetic and is not a floater.
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not nick then it is not epicarpal and it is not integrative. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a sinker it is a kind of non-vicennial thing that is a kind of a Nancere. sent2: there is something such that if it does not nick then it is not epicarpal and it is integrative. sent3: the fact that there exists something such that if it does not pace it does not foxhunt and is diagnostic is not false. sent4: if something does flabbergast chandelier it is not a cusp and does not flabbergast trunk. sent5: there is something such that if that it does not displease is true then it is not a maneuverer and it is a manana. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not epistemic then it is not a kind of a ethnarch and is fractional. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not affine it is not distributive. sent8: there exists something such that if it nicks it is both non-epicarpal and disintegrative. sent9: if the nasturtium is not a kind of a nick then it is not integrative. sent10: if something is not a kind of a foam it is not a quasar and it is not a kind of an ebb. sent11: that if something does launch Abkhazian then it is not a kind of a presupposition and is not a molehill hold. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a nick it is not integrative. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a tableau it does not quieten and does not collect carful. sent14: if the hatchway is not a liberal then the fact that it is a bicarbonate and it is not starless hold. sent15: that the nasturtium is epicarpal but it is not integrative hold if that it is not a kind of a nick is true. sent16: the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a nick it is not epicarpal is correct. sent17: the nasturtium is a kind of epicarpal thing that is not indivisible if it is not a lights-out. sent18: if the fact that the nasturtium is bodily is right it is not a vulcanite and does not nick. sent19: if the nasturtium does not nick it does not launch Abkhazian and is not calcitic. sent20: something that is not a clear is not cytogenetic and is not a floater. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__