the fact that the goal is Hemingwayesque and does not crave is false.
sent1: if the eschatologist is a leopard then the carillon is a fitting but not a neoclassicist. sent2: something is Hemingwayesque but it does not crave if it is a kunzite. sent3: the fact that the hydroxychloroquine is catoptric but it is not livable does not hold. sent4: if something is not cheap it is not extramural. sent5: the goal is cheap. sent6: that the hydroxychloroquine is not livable if the ciderpress is extramural and it is livable hold. sent7: that something is a macroevolution and it is waxen is not true if it is non-neoclassicist. sent8: something is not extramural if it is not Hemingwayesque. sent9: the ciderpress is both extramural and livable if the shuffler is not cheap. sent10: if the hydroxychloroquine is not livable then the goal is catoptric and is a kind of a kunzite. sent11: the ciderpress either craves or is livable or both. sent12: the fact that the hydroxychloroquine is livable if something is catoptric is right. sent13: the ciderpress is livable if something is a kunzite and/or it is catoptric. sent14: if the carillon is not a macroevolution the fact that the shuffler is dysgenics and it is cheap is false. sent15: the goal is a Skinnerian. sent16: the ciderpress is epilithic. sent17: the ciderpress is both not livable and cheap. sent18: the fact that the goal is Hemingwayesque but it does not crave is not true if the hydroxychloroquine is non-extramural. sent19: something is not cheap if that it is dysgenics and it is cheap is not right. sent20: there is something such that it is either Hemingwayesque or not non-extramural or both. sent21: that that the rectification is cheap thing that is not a kind of a respondent is true is not correct. sent22: that the SOD is a baron but it does not barbarize subsumption is false. sent23: something is not a macroevolution if the fact that it is a kind of a macroevolution and it is waxen does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hydroxychloroquine is catoptric.; assump1 -> int1: the hydroxychloroquine either is a kind of a kunzite or is not non-catoptric or both.; int1 -> int2: something is a kind of a kunzite and/or it is catoptric.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the ciderpress is livable.; sent17 -> int4: the ciderpress is not livable.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the hydroxychloroquine is not catoptric.;
the goal is Hemingwayesque but it does not crave.
sent2 -> int7: the goal is Hemingwayesque thing that does not crave if it is a kind of a kunzite.; sent19 -> int8: if that the shuffler is dysgenics and it is cheap is not correct then that it is not cheap is not false.; sent23 -> int9: if the fact that the carillon is a kind of a macroevolution and is waxen does not hold then it is not a macroevolution.; sent7 -> int10: that that the carillon is the macroevolution and it is waxen is incorrect if the carillon is not a neoclassicist hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the goal is Hemingwayesque and does not crave is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the eschatologist is a leopard then the carillon is a fitting but not a neoclassicist. sent2: something is Hemingwayesque but it does not crave if it is a kunzite. sent3: the fact that the hydroxychloroquine is catoptric but it is not livable does not hold. sent4: if something is not cheap it is not extramural. sent5: the goal is cheap. sent6: that the hydroxychloroquine is not livable if the ciderpress is extramural and it is livable hold. sent7: that something is a macroevolution and it is waxen is not true if it is non-neoclassicist. sent8: something is not extramural if it is not Hemingwayesque. sent9: the ciderpress is both extramural and livable if the shuffler is not cheap. sent10: if the hydroxychloroquine is not livable then the goal is catoptric and is a kind of a kunzite. sent11: the ciderpress either craves or is livable or both. sent12: the fact that the hydroxychloroquine is livable if something is catoptric is right. sent13: the ciderpress is livable if something is a kunzite and/or it is catoptric. sent14: if the carillon is not a macroevolution the fact that the shuffler is dysgenics and it is cheap is false. sent15: the goal is a Skinnerian. sent16: the ciderpress is epilithic. sent17: the ciderpress is both not livable and cheap. sent18: the fact that the goal is Hemingwayesque but it does not crave is not true if the hydroxychloroquine is non-extramural. sent19: something is not cheap if that it is dysgenics and it is cheap is not right. sent20: there is something such that it is either Hemingwayesque or not non-extramural or both. sent21: that that the rectification is cheap thing that is not a kind of a respondent is true is not correct. sent22: that the SOD is a baron but it does not barbarize subsumption is false. sent23: something is not a macroevolution if the fact that it is a kind of a macroevolution and it is waxen does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hydroxychloroquine is catoptric.; assump1 -> int1: the hydroxychloroquine either is a kind of a kunzite or is not non-catoptric or both.; int1 -> int2: something is a kind of a kunzite and/or it is catoptric.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the ciderpress is livable.; sent17 -> int4: the ciderpress is not livable.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the hydroxychloroquine is not catoptric.; __UNKNOWN__