that the whip-snake does not photostat Stuttgart and it is not high-tech is not correct.
sent1: the Coue is active. sent2: the Coue is a spinelessness or is semiautobiographical or both. sent3: if something is a accountantship the fact that it is a spinelessness hold. sent4: the whip-snake does revive. sent5: if the thermistor does not wash then that the Coue is a kind of a spinelessness that is a toothpick does not hold. sent6: the thermistor is not a kind of a wash if the fact that the syrup does not photostat Rankine and is a Kalimantan does not hold. sent7: that the Coue refrains whip-snake but it is not a accountantship is wrong. sent8: the fact that the thermistor is not a toothpick is not wrong if the fact that it does not photostat Rankine and does refrain whip-snake is not correct. sent9: that the thermistor does not photostat Rankine and does refrain whip-snake is not right. sent10: the Coue does not photostat Rankine if something is a kind of a spinelessness and/or it does photostat Stuttgart. sent11: if the syrup does not refrain whip-snake then that it does not photostat Rankine and it is a kind of a Kalimantan is not true. sent12: if the thermistor is not a Kalimantan that the whip-snake does not photostat Rankine and photostats Stuttgart is not true. sent13: the fact that the Coue does not photostat Rankine is right if there is something such that it is a spinelessness. sent14: if the whip-snake does not photostat Stuttgart then that the thermistor does not photostat Rankine and is not high-tech is incorrect. sent15: that the thermistor is a toothpick but it does not photostat Stuttgart does not hold. sent16: the syrup is not a kind of a Kalimantan if there is something such that it is a spinelessness or it washes or both. sent17: that the whip-snake is a Kalimantan but it is not high-tech does not hold. sent18: if that the Coue is not a kind of a accountantship is not false the thermistor is a toothpick.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Coue is not a accountantship.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the thermistor is a toothpick.; sent8 & sent9 -> int2: the thermistor is not a kind of a toothpick.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the Coue is a accountantship.; sent3 -> int5: the Coue is a spinelessness if it is a accountantship.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the Coue is a spinelessness.; int6 -> int7: the Coue is a spinelessness or is a wash or both.; int7 -> int8: something is a kind of a spinelessness or it is a wash or both.; int8 & sent16 -> int9: the syrup is not a Kalimantan.;
the whip-snake does not photostat Stuttgart and is not high-tech.
$hypothesis$ = that the whip-snake does not photostat Stuttgart and it is not high-tech is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the Coue is active. sent2: the Coue is a spinelessness or is semiautobiographical or both. sent3: if something is a accountantship the fact that it is a spinelessness hold. sent4: the whip-snake does revive. sent5: if the thermistor does not wash then that the Coue is a kind of a spinelessness that is a toothpick does not hold. sent6: the thermistor is not a kind of a wash if the fact that the syrup does not photostat Rankine and is a Kalimantan does not hold. sent7: that the Coue refrains whip-snake but it is not a accountantship is wrong. sent8: the fact that the thermistor is not a toothpick is not wrong if the fact that it does not photostat Rankine and does refrain whip-snake is not correct. sent9: that the thermistor does not photostat Rankine and does refrain whip-snake is not right. sent10: the Coue does not photostat Rankine if something is a kind of a spinelessness and/or it does photostat Stuttgart. sent11: if the syrup does not refrain whip-snake then that it does not photostat Rankine and it is a kind of a Kalimantan is not true. sent12: if the thermistor is not a Kalimantan that the whip-snake does not photostat Rankine and photostats Stuttgart is not true. sent13: the fact that the Coue does not photostat Rankine is right if there is something such that it is a spinelessness. sent14: if the whip-snake does not photostat Stuttgart then that the thermistor does not photostat Rankine and is not high-tech is incorrect. sent15: that the thermistor is a toothpick but it does not photostat Stuttgart does not hold. sent16: the syrup is not a kind of a Kalimantan if there is something such that it is a spinelessness or it washes or both. sent17: that the whip-snake is a Kalimantan but it is not high-tech does not hold. sent18: if that the Coue is not a kind of a accountantship is not false the thermistor is a toothpick. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Coue is not a accountantship.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the thermistor is a toothpick.; sent8 & sent9 -> int2: the thermistor is not a kind of a toothpick.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the Coue is a accountantship.; sent3 -> int5: the Coue is a spinelessness if it is a accountantship.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the Coue is a spinelessness.; int6 -> int7: the Coue is a spinelessness or is a wash or both.; int7 -> int8: something is a kind of a spinelessness or it is a wash or both.; int8 & sent16 -> int9: the syrup is not a Kalimantan.; __UNKNOWN__