the fact that that the owner is not sternutatory but it impinges pasqueflower is wrong is correct.
sent1: the owner does brief streaker and does vacuum magnetron. sent2: if the owner does not peruse baker that it is not sternutatory and it does impinge pasqueflower is false. sent3: the baker does not palatalize and is not animated. sent4: something does not impinge athleticism and is unprophetic. sent5: the planetoid is not an aphrodisiac and/or it does exhaust if there exists something such that it peruses entree. sent6: if the planetoid is either not an aphrodisiac or an exhaust or both then that the flintlock does not exhaust hold. sent7: the baker does not impinge Trinidadian if it does not palatalize and it is not animated. sent8: that something is an epidemiology that is vibrionic is not true if it is not carroty. sent9: if the fact that the bitterwood is an epidemiology and vibrionic is wrong then the celebrity is not vibrionic. sent10: something that is not an exhaust impinges pasqueflower and is sternutatory. sent11: the bitterwood does not impinge hydrometry or is nonexistent or both if there exists something such that it does not impinge Trinidadian. sent12: the owner briefs streaker. sent13: that the chevrotain is not a kind of a reimbursement and does not peruse baker is not right if the celebrity is not vibrionic. sent14: that the owner is sternutatory thing that does impinge pasqueflower does not hold if it does not peruse baker. sent15: if something that does not impinge athleticism is unprophetic then the shopkeeper veils. sent16: if either something does not impinge hydrometry or it is nonexistent or both that it is not carroty is right. sent17: the papaw peruses entree if the shopkeeper does veil. sent18: the fact that the owner is sternutatory and it does impinge pasqueflower is not true. sent19: if something briefs streaker and it does vacuum magnetron it does not peruse baker. sent20: the fact that the flintlock is a kind of a reimbursement hold if the fact that the chevrotain is not a reimbursement and it does not peruse baker does not hold.
sent19 -> int1: the owner does not peruse baker if it does brief streaker and vacuums magnetron.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the owner does not peruse baker.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the flintlock is a reimbursement and it impinges pasqueflower.
sent8 -> int3: that the bitterwood is an epidemiology and it is vibrionic is wrong if it is not carroty.; sent16 -> int4: if either the bitterwood does not impinge hydrometry or it is nonexistent or both it is not carroty.; sent7 & sent3 -> int5: the baker does not impinge Trinidadian.; int5 -> int6: something does not impinge Trinidadian.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the bitterwood does not impinge hydrometry and/or is nonexistent.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the bitterwood is not carroty.; int3 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the bitterwood is a kind of an epidemiology and it is vibrionic does not hold.; sent9 & int9 -> int10: the celebrity is not vibrionic.; sent13 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the chevrotain is not a reimbursement and it does not peruse baker is not correct.; sent20 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the flintlock is a kind of a reimbursement is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int13: if the flintlock is not an exhaust then it impinges pasqueflower and is sternutatory.; sent4 & sent15 -> int14: the shopkeeper does veil.; sent17 & int14 -> int15: the papaw does peruse entree.; int15 -> int16: there is something such that it does peruse entree.; int16 & sent5 -> int17: the planetoid is not an aphrodisiac or it does exhaust or both.; sent6 & int17 -> int18: the flintlock is not an exhaust.; int13 & int18 -> int19: the flintlock does impinge pasqueflower and it is sternutatory.; int19 -> int20: the fact that the flintlock does impinge pasqueflower hold.; int12 & int20 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the owner is not sternutatory but it impinges pasqueflower is wrong is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the owner does brief streaker and does vacuum magnetron. sent2: if the owner does not peruse baker that it is not sternutatory and it does impinge pasqueflower is false. sent3: the baker does not palatalize and is not animated. sent4: something does not impinge athleticism and is unprophetic. sent5: the planetoid is not an aphrodisiac and/or it does exhaust if there exists something such that it peruses entree. sent6: if the planetoid is either not an aphrodisiac or an exhaust or both then that the flintlock does not exhaust hold. sent7: the baker does not impinge Trinidadian if it does not palatalize and it is not animated. sent8: that something is an epidemiology that is vibrionic is not true if it is not carroty. sent9: if the fact that the bitterwood is an epidemiology and vibrionic is wrong then the celebrity is not vibrionic. sent10: something that is not an exhaust impinges pasqueflower and is sternutatory. sent11: the bitterwood does not impinge hydrometry or is nonexistent or both if there exists something such that it does not impinge Trinidadian. sent12: the owner briefs streaker. sent13: that the chevrotain is not a kind of a reimbursement and does not peruse baker is not right if the celebrity is not vibrionic. sent14: that the owner is sternutatory thing that does impinge pasqueflower does not hold if it does not peruse baker. sent15: if something that does not impinge athleticism is unprophetic then the shopkeeper veils. sent16: if either something does not impinge hydrometry or it is nonexistent or both that it is not carroty is right. sent17: the papaw peruses entree if the shopkeeper does veil. sent18: the fact that the owner is sternutatory and it does impinge pasqueflower is not true. sent19: if something briefs streaker and it does vacuum magnetron it does not peruse baker. sent20: the fact that the flintlock is a kind of a reimbursement hold if the fact that the chevrotain is not a reimbursement and it does not peruse baker does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent19 -> int1: the owner does not peruse baker if it does brief streaker and vacuums magnetron.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the owner does not peruse baker.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__