the microdot is a kind of non-Theban thing that is a selfsameness.
sent1: the mendelevium does fumble campaigner and it is a kind of a slapshot. sent2: if the mendelevium fumbles campaigner the gharry is not a kind of a concentrate. sent3: there exists something such that it does concentrate. sent4: the microdot is a selfsameness. sent5: the mendelevium is a kind of non-alluvial thing that is a kind of a slapshot if the campaigner is not a kind of a concentrate. sent6: the campaigner is not alluvial if that something is not a kind of a concentrate is not incorrect. sent7: the fact that the gharry is Theban is right. sent8: the gharry is a slapshot if the campaigner is not a slapshot and it is not a kind of a concentrate. sent9: that the mendelevium is a kind of a slapshot is not false. sent10: the Peel is not a jackfruit but it is a Katowice. sent11: if there is something such that that either it concentrates or it is a slapshot or both is incorrect that the fact that the microdot does fumble campaigner is not correct is true. sent12: that the campaigner is not nonfunctional is right. sent13: the campaigner is not a kind of a Mesua but it is a Sumatran. sent14: that the microdot is a selfsameness is not incorrect if the campaigner is not alluvial. sent15: the mendelevium is not a A-team.
sent1 -> int1: the mendelevium does fumble campaigner.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the gharry is not a kind of a concentrate.; int2 -> int3: that there exists something such that it does not concentrate is not false.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the campaigner is not alluvial.;
the microdot does not slice Redford.
$hypothesis$ = the microdot is a kind of non-Theban thing that is a selfsameness. ; $context$ = sent1: the mendelevium does fumble campaigner and it is a kind of a slapshot. sent2: if the mendelevium fumbles campaigner the gharry is not a kind of a concentrate. sent3: there exists something such that it does concentrate. sent4: the microdot is a selfsameness. sent5: the mendelevium is a kind of non-alluvial thing that is a kind of a slapshot if the campaigner is not a kind of a concentrate. sent6: the campaigner is not alluvial if that something is not a kind of a concentrate is not incorrect. sent7: the fact that the gharry is Theban is right. sent8: the gharry is a slapshot if the campaigner is not a slapshot and it is not a kind of a concentrate. sent9: that the mendelevium is a kind of a slapshot is not false. sent10: the Peel is not a jackfruit but it is a Katowice. sent11: if there is something such that that either it concentrates or it is a slapshot or both is incorrect that the fact that the microdot does fumble campaigner is not correct is true. sent12: that the campaigner is not nonfunctional is right. sent13: the campaigner is not a kind of a Mesua but it is a Sumatran. sent14: that the microdot is a selfsameness is not incorrect if the campaigner is not alluvial. sent15: the mendelevium is not a A-team. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: the mendelevium does fumble campaigner.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the gharry is not a kind of a concentrate.; int2 -> int3: that there exists something such that it does not concentrate is not false.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the campaigner is not alluvial.; __UNKNOWN__