the antimycin does not lurch dampener.
sent1: the dampener is not a kind of a dimmer if something is complete. sent2: if the palfrey is not nonfissionable but it is a Pyramid then the viscera is a Pyramid. sent3: the footballer is not entomophilous. sent4: if that something does not carol pipeclay and is not expressible does not hold then it is expressible. sent5: the antimycin does lurch dockyard and it cheats. sent6: the gamekeeper is not nonfissionable if there exists something such that it lurches dampener. sent7: the palfrey is not nonfissionable but a Pyramid if the sewer does not carol stannite. sent8: if that something does not croon and it is not a Bonhoeffer does not hold then it does not carol stannite. sent9: that the whinstone does not carol pipeclay and it is not expressible is false if the footballer is not entomophilous. sent10: the prod is not hard if it copes daisybush and does lurch dampener. sent11: the antimycin does lurch dampener and does carol stannite if it does not croon. sent12: the bowhead does complete if the whinstone is expressible. sent13: the fact that the Monophysite does not lurch dampener and is thespian does not hold if the viscera is a Pyramid. sent14: that the sewer does not croon and is not a Bonhoeffer is not correct if that there exists something such that it is a Bonhoeffer is not wrong. sent15: if the antimycin is a Adiantum and does lurch dampener it is not a melanocyte. sent16: something is a kind of a Bonhoeffer that is a regency if it is not a kind of a dimmer. sent17: that the antimycin is nonfissionable is not incorrect. sent18: the stannite is a kind of a Pyramid. sent19: the antimycin is a Pyramid if the fact that it is thespian is not incorrect. sent20: the antimycin does not lurch dampener if the fact that it is a kind of a Pyramid and it is nonfissionable is true.
the antimycin does lurch dampener.
sent8 -> int1: if that the sewer does not croon and it is not a Bonhoeffer does not hold it does not carol stannite.; sent16 -> int2: if the dampener is not a dimmer then it is both a Bonhoeffer and a regency.; sent4 -> int3: the whinstone is expressible if the fact that it does not carol pipeclay and it is not expressible is not right.; sent9 & sent3 -> int4: that the fact that that the whinstone does not carol pipeclay and it is not expressible is not false is not true is right.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the whinstone is expressible.; sent12 & int5 -> int6: the bowhead is not incomplete.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it completes.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: that the dampener is not a dimmer is not incorrect.; int2 & int8 -> int9: the dampener is a Bonhoeffer that is a kind of a regency.; int9 -> int10: the dampener is a kind of a Bonhoeffer.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that it is a kind of a Bonhoeffer.; int11 & sent14 -> int12: that the sewer does not croon and it is not a kind of a Bonhoeffer is false.; int1 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the sewer does not carol stannite is not false.; sent7 & int13 -> int14: the palfrey is a kind of fissionable thing that is a Pyramid.; sent2 & int14 -> int15: the viscera is a Pyramid.; sent13 & int15 -> int16: that the fact that the Monophysite does not lurch dampener and is thespian is true is wrong.; int16 -> int17: there is something such that the fact that it does not lurch dampener and is thespian is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the antimycin does not lurch dampener. ; $context$ = sent1: the dampener is not a kind of a dimmer if something is complete. sent2: if the palfrey is not nonfissionable but it is a Pyramid then the viscera is a Pyramid. sent3: the footballer is not entomophilous. sent4: if that something does not carol pipeclay and is not expressible does not hold then it is expressible. sent5: the antimycin does lurch dockyard and it cheats. sent6: the gamekeeper is not nonfissionable if there exists something such that it lurches dampener. sent7: the palfrey is not nonfissionable but a Pyramid if the sewer does not carol stannite. sent8: if that something does not croon and it is not a Bonhoeffer does not hold then it does not carol stannite. sent9: that the whinstone does not carol pipeclay and it is not expressible is false if the footballer is not entomophilous. sent10: the prod is not hard if it copes daisybush and does lurch dampener. sent11: the antimycin does lurch dampener and does carol stannite if it does not croon. sent12: the bowhead does complete if the whinstone is expressible. sent13: the fact that the Monophysite does not lurch dampener and is thespian does not hold if the viscera is a Pyramid. sent14: that the sewer does not croon and is not a Bonhoeffer is not correct if that there exists something such that it is a Bonhoeffer is not wrong. sent15: if the antimycin is a Adiantum and does lurch dampener it is not a melanocyte. sent16: something is a kind of a Bonhoeffer that is a regency if it is not a kind of a dimmer. sent17: that the antimycin is nonfissionable is not incorrect. sent18: the stannite is a kind of a Pyramid. sent19: the antimycin is a Pyramid if the fact that it is thespian is not incorrect. sent20: the antimycin does not lurch dampener if the fact that it is a kind of a Pyramid and it is nonfissionable is true. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__