the nombril is metric.
sent1: the ibuprofen is gymnastics if the caliphate is a kind of a two-step that is not gymnastics. sent2: the paddle-wheeler is Moroccan. sent3: if the fact that the newsreel is a strategist and is not a credulousness is not correct then the ibuprofen is not an agitation. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a strategist and it is not a kind of a credulousness then the nombril is a metric. sent5: if there is something such that that it sprays kowtow and is a kind of a two-step is not true the caliphate does not sprays kowtow. sent6: the ibuprofen is not an agitation if that the newsreel is not a strategist is right. sent7: the kohlrabi is emmetropic if there exists something such that it is not an agitation. sent8: the newsreel is emmetropic if that the kohlrabi is emmetropic is true. sent9: that if the paddle-wheeler is not non-Moroccan then the fact that the MEDLINE is a kind of non-eruptive thing that communicates lameness does not hold is not wrong. sent10: the kohlrabi is emmetropic if there is something such that the fact that it is non-eruptive thing that does communicate lameness is not right. sent11: if the fact that the kohlrabi is not emmetropic or gymnastics or both is wrong then the caliphate does spray kowtow. sent12: the kohlrabi is emmetropic. sent13: there is nothing such that it does spray kowtow and it does two-step. sent14: if the ibuprofen is gymnastics the newsreel is an agitation. sent15: the fact that the caliphate is a two-step if the orchid is a two-step hold. sent16: that the fact that the kohlrabi is not emmetropic and/or is gymnastics is not incorrect does not hold if there is something such that it is not a kind of an agitation. sent17: the kohlrabi is not gymnastics if there is something such that it is gymnastics.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the newsreel is a kind of a strategist but it is not a credulousness is not right.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the ibuprofen is not an agitation is correct.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is not an agitation.; int2 & sent16 -> int3: that the kohlrabi is not emmetropic or it is gymnastics or both does not hold.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: the caliphate does spray kowtow.; sent13 -> int5: the fact that the orchid does spray kowtow and it is a two-step does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it sprays kowtow and it is a two-step does not hold.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the caliphate does not spray kowtow.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the newsreel is a strategist and not a credulousness.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is a strategist and it is not a credulousness.; int10 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the nombril is not metric.
sent9 & sent2 -> int11: the fact that the MEDLINE is non-eruptive thing that communicates lameness is not right.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-eruptive thing that does communicate lameness is false.; int12 & sent10 -> int13: the kohlrabi is emmetropic.; sent8 & int13 -> int14: the newsreel is emmetropic.;
$hypothesis$ = the nombril is metric. ; $context$ = sent1: the ibuprofen is gymnastics if the caliphate is a kind of a two-step that is not gymnastics. sent2: the paddle-wheeler is Moroccan. sent3: if the fact that the newsreel is a strategist and is not a credulousness is not correct then the ibuprofen is not an agitation. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a strategist and it is not a kind of a credulousness then the nombril is a metric. sent5: if there is something such that that it sprays kowtow and is a kind of a two-step is not true the caliphate does not sprays kowtow. sent6: the ibuprofen is not an agitation if that the newsreel is not a strategist is right. sent7: the kohlrabi is emmetropic if there exists something such that it is not an agitation. sent8: the newsreel is emmetropic if that the kohlrabi is emmetropic is true. sent9: that if the paddle-wheeler is not non-Moroccan then the fact that the MEDLINE is a kind of non-eruptive thing that communicates lameness does not hold is not wrong. sent10: the kohlrabi is emmetropic if there is something such that the fact that it is non-eruptive thing that does communicate lameness is not right. sent11: if the fact that the kohlrabi is not emmetropic or gymnastics or both is wrong then the caliphate does spray kowtow. sent12: the kohlrabi is emmetropic. sent13: there is nothing such that it does spray kowtow and it does two-step. sent14: if the ibuprofen is gymnastics the newsreel is an agitation. sent15: the fact that the caliphate is a two-step if the orchid is a two-step hold. sent16: that the fact that the kohlrabi is not emmetropic and/or is gymnastics is not incorrect does not hold if there is something such that it is not a kind of an agitation. sent17: the kohlrabi is not gymnastics if there is something such that it is gymnastics. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the newsreel is a kind of a strategist but it is not a credulousness is not right.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the ibuprofen is not an agitation is correct.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is not an agitation.; int2 & sent16 -> int3: that the kohlrabi is not emmetropic or it is gymnastics or both does not hold.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: the caliphate does spray kowtow.; sent13 -> int5: the fact that the orchid does spray kowtow and it is a two-step does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it sprays kowtow and it is a two-step does not hold.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the caliphate does not spray kowtow.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> int9: the newsreel is a strategist and not a credulousness.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is a strategist and it is not a credulousness.; int10 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__