the acarine does instruct Phylloscopus but it is not a kind of a Cotswold.
sent1: if something that is aground is not a burdened then it instructs Phylloscopus. sent2: if the firehouse does not commiserate thrilling then that the doubler does not axe Arendt and is an explanation does not hold. sent3: if that something is not moderate or it is consular or both does not hold then it does not commiserate thrilling. sent4: the acarine does ramble tire but it is not a noseband. sent5: if the acarine is not consular then that it is not aground and it does not commiserate thrilling does not hold. sent6: if something is consular it is not an explanation and it is not aground. sent7: the Rheum does not burden if there is something such that the fact that it does not axe tonometry and it is a monotony is wrong. sent8: the naumachy axes Arendt. sent9: the acarine does not axe tonometry but it does instruct Phylloscopus. sent10: something is not an explanation if it does not axe Arendt. sent11: the acarine does commiserate thrilling if the doubler does axe Arendt. sent12: that something does not axe Arendt and does not commiserate thrilling is false if it is not a monotony. sent13: the naumachy is a trophoblast and it is an explanation. sent14: that the firehouse is not moderate and/or it is consular does not hold. sent15: the doubler does axe Arendt if something does not axe tonometry but it is a monotony. sent16: that the Rheum is not a burdened is correct if there exists something such that it axes tonometry. sent17: something that commiserates thrilling instructs Phylloscopus and is not a kind of a Cotswold. sent18: if something does not burden that it is both not an explanation and not aground is not right. sent19: the combustible is artful. sent20: the fact that something does instruct Phylloscopus but it is not a kind of a Cotswold is wrong if it is not a burdened. sent21: if that the Rheum axes Arendt hold then the doubler is aground. sent22: the naumachy does instruct Phylloscopus if something is a Cotswold and it is a monotony. sent23: if the firehouse is a kind of non-consular thing that does commiserate thrilling then the acarine does not commiserate thrilling.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the naumachy does not axe tonometry and is a monotony is false.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does not axe tonometry and is a monotony does not hold.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the Rheum is not a kind of a burdened.; sent18 -> int3: if the Rheum does not burden then that it is not an explanation and is not aground does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the Rheum is not an explanation and it is not aground is false.; sent6 -> int5: the Rheum is not a kind of an explanation and is not aground if it is consular.; sent17 -> int6: if the acarine commiserates thrilling then it does instruct Phylloscopus and is not a kind of a Cotswold.;
the fact that the acarine does instruct Phylloscopus and is not a Cotswold does not hold.
sent20 -> int7: if the acarine does not burden then the fact that it instructs Phylloscopus and is not a kind of a Cotswold is false.; sent3 -> int8: if the fact that the firehouse is not moderate or consular or both is not true that it does not commiserate thrilling is not wrong.; int8 & sent14 -> int9: the fact that the firehouse does not commiserate thrilling is correct.; sent2 & int9 -> int10: that the doubler does not axe Arendt but it is a kind of an explanation is wrong.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that the fact that it does not axe Arendt and is an explanation is false.;
$hypothesis$ = the acarine does instruct Phylloscopus but it is not a kind of a Cotswold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is aground is not a burdened then it instructs Phylloscopus. sent2: if the firehouse does not commiserate thrilling then that the doubler does not axe Arendt and is an explanation does not hold. sent3: if that something is not moderate or it is consular or both does not hold then it does not commiserate thrilling. sent4: the acarine does ramble tire but it is not a noseband. sent5: if the acarine is not consular then that it is not aground and it does not commiserate thrilling does not hold. sent6: if something is consular it is not an explanation and it is not aground. sent7: the Rheum does not burden if there is something such that the fact that it does not axe tonometry and it is a monotony is wrong. sent8: the naumachy axes Arendt. sent9: the acarine does not axe tonometry but it does instruct Phylloscopus. sent10: something is not an explanation if it does not axe Arendt. sent11: the acarine does commiserate thrilling if the doubler does axe Arendt. sent12: that something does not axe Arendt and does not commiserate thrilling is false if it is not a monotony. sent13: the naumachy is a trophoblast and it is an explanation. sent14: that the firehouse is not moderate and/or it is consular does not hold. sent15: the doubler does axe Arendt if something does not axe tonometry but it is a monotony. sent16: that the Rheum is not a burdened is correct if there exists something such that it axes tonometry. sent17: something that commiserates thrilling instructs Phylloscopus and is not a kind of a Cotswold. sent18: if something does not burden that it is both not an explanation and not aground is not right. sent19: the combustible is artful. sent20: the fact that something does instruct Phylloscopus but it is not a kind of a Cotswold is wrong if it is not a burdened. sent21: if that the Rheum axes Arendt hold then the doubler is aground. sent22: the naumachy does instruct Phylloscopus if something is a Cotswold and it is a monotony. sent23: if the firehouse is a kind of non-consular thing that does commiserate thrilling then the acarine does not commiserate thrilling. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the naumachy does not axe tonometry and is a monotony is false.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does not axe tonometry and is a monotony does not hold.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the Rheum is not a kind of a burdened.; sent18 -> int3: if the Rheum does not burden then that it is not an explanation and is not aground does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the Rheum is not an explanation and it is not aground is false.; sent6 -> int5: the Rheum is not a kind of an explanation and is not aground if it is consular.; sent17 -> int6: if the acarine commiserates thrilling then it does instruct Phylloscopus and is not a kind of a Cotswold.; __UNKNOWN__