if the subshrub is not a Eustachio then the tosser is not a dyscalculia but it does catalyze Saxifraga.
sent1: there is something such that it is not a dyscalculia. sent2: if something is catadromous then that it is not a Eustachio and it is not aeromechanic is incorrect. sent3: the trunk is a Oder and it is catadromous if the tosser is thalamocortical. sent4: the trunk is not catadromous if it is aeromechanic and does slice correspondence. sent5: if the trunk is not a Eustachio the subshrub is aeromechanic and it is a Eustachio. sent6: the laurel is catadromous. sent7: something is not a acebutolol if that it is not a Eustachio and it is not aeromechanic does not hold. sent8: the fact that the subshrub is a kind of a dyscalculia is true if there is something such that it is not a Eustachio. sent9: if the subshrub is not a Eustachio the trunk does slice correspondence and it is thalamocortical. sent10: the granny is thalamocortical if it is a cryptogam. sent11: the subshrub does not slice correspondence. sent12: the trunk does catalyze Saxifraga. sent13: if the trunk is not a protectionist then the tosser is both not catadromous and a Oder. sent14: the tosser is thalamocortical and aeromechanic if the trunk is not a protectionist. sent15: if the tosser is not a Eustachio then the fact that the trunk is not catadromous but thalamocortical is correct. sent16: the tosser is a Oder. sent17: if something is not a kind of a proposal the tosser does catalyze Saxifraga. sent18: the tosser is both a Oder and a protectionist. sent19: that the tosser is a protectionist and is catadromous hold if the trunk is not catadromous. sent20: if something slices correspondence then it is a kind of a Eustachio. sent21: the subshrub is not thalamocortical. sent22: the trunk is a kind of a Oder. sent23: the tosser is not a dyscalculia if it is a protectionist that is catadromous. sent24: if the fact that something is a kind of a Oder is right it is aeromechanic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the subshrub is not a Eustachio is not incorrect.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the trunk slices correspondence and is thalamocortical.; int1 -> int2: the trunk does slice correspondence.; sent24 -> int3: the trunk is aeromechanic if it is a Oder.; int3 & sent22 -> int4: the trunk is not non-aeromechanic.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the trunk is aeromechanic and it does slice correspondence.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the trunk is not catadromous.; int6 & sent19 -> int7: the tosser is a protectionist and not non-catadromous.; int7 & sent23 -> int8: the tosser is not a kind of a dyscalculia.;
there is something such that it is not a acebutolol.
sent7 -> int9: if that the subshrub is not a Eustachio and is not aeromechanic is incorrect then the fact that it is not a kind of a acebutolol is true.; sent2 -> int10: if the subshrub is catadromous that it is not a Eustachio and not aeromechanic is false.;
$hypothesis$ = if the subshrub is not a Eustachio then the tosser is not a dyscalculia but it does catalyze Saxifraga. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not a dyscalculia. sent2: if something is catadromous then that it is not a Eustachio and it is not aeromechanic is incorrect. sent3: the trunk is a Oder and it is catadromous if the tosser is thalamocortical. sent4: the trunk is not catadromous if it is aeromechanic and does slice correspondence. sent5: if the trunk is not a Eustachio the subshrub is aeromechanic and it is a Eustachio. sent6: the laurel is catadromous. sent7: something is not a acebutolol if that it is not a Eustachio and it is not aeromechanic does not hold. sent8: the fact that the subshrub is a kind of a dyscalculia is true if there is something such that it is not a Eustachio. sent9: if the subshrub is not a Eustachio the trunk does slice correspondence and it is thalamocortical. sent10: the granny is thalamocortical if it is a cryptogam. sent11: the subshrub does not slice correspondence. sent12: the trunk does catalyze Saxifraga. sent13: if the trunk is not a protectionist then the tosser is both not catadromous and a Oder. sent14: the tosser is thalamocortical and aeromechanic if the trunk is not a protectionist. sent15: if the tosser is not a Eustachio then the fact that the trunk is not catadromous but thalamocortical is correct. sent16: the tosser is a Oder. sent17: if something is not a kind of a proposal the tosser does catalyze Saxifraga. sent18: the tosser is both a Oder and a protectionist. sent19: that the tosser is a protectionist and is catadromous hold if the trunk is not catadromous. sent20: if something slices correspondence then it is a kind of a Eustachio. sent21: the subshrub is not thalamocortical. sent22: the trunk is a kind of a Oder. sent23: the tosser is not a dyscalculia if it is a protectionist that is catadromous. sent24: if the fact that something is a kind of a Oder is right it is aeromechanic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the subshrub is not a Eustachio is not incorrect.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the trunk slices correspondence and is thalamocortical.; int1 -> int2: the trunk does slice correspondence.; sent24 -> int3: the trunk is aeromechanic if it is a Oder.; int3 & sent22 -> int4: the trunk is not non-aeromechanic.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the trunk is aeromechanic and it does slice correspondence.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the trunk is not catadromous.; int6 & sent19 -> int7: the tosser is a protectionist and not non-catadromous.; int7 & sent23 -> int8: the tosser is not a kind of a dyscalculia.; __UNKNOWN__