the bantamweight sneers baneberry.
sent1: if something is not a pickings then that it unionizes subordinating and does not sneer baneberry is wrong. sent2: the paw either does strangulate or is not a pickings or both. sent3: something is not fibrocalcific if the fact that it is not evaporative and it is not hospitable is wrong. sent4: that the nester is choreographic and weedless is not true. sent5: the bantamweight sneers baneberry if the Austrian is not variable. sent6: something is a kind of a pickings if it is a devotion and it does not unionize subordinating. sent7: if the paw is a pickings the Austrian either is a pickings or is not a kind of a variable or both. sent8: if the Austrian is not a kind of a devotion then the fact that it does not unionize subordinating and it is not variable is not right. sent9: that the nester does not strangulate is not wrong if that it is choreographic and weedless does not hold. sent10: the Austrian is not a pickings if that it is invariable and it is not a kind of a devotion is wrong. sent11: the Austrian does not strangulate. sent12: that something is not evaporative and is not hospitable is not true if the fact that it does not strangulate hold. sent13: the nester is fibrocalcific if the Austrian is a pickings and/or it is not variable. sent14: if the fact that the fact that the paw is a devotion but it does not unionize subordinating is not true is not incorrect the bantamweight does not sneer baneberry. sent15: the nester is not a pickings if the paw does strangulate.
sent6 -> int1: if the paw is a devotion but it does not unionize subordinating then it is a pickings.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the paw is a devotion that does not unionize subordinating.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the paw is a kind of a pickings.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: either the Austrian is a kind of a pickings or it is not a kind of a variable or both.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the nester is fibrocalcific.; sent3 -> int5: if the fact that the nester is a kind of non-evaporative thing that is not hospitable is wrong it is not fibrocalcific.; sent12 -> int6: the fact that the nester is both not evaporative and not hospitable does not hold if that it does not strangulate is true.; sent9 & sent4 -> int7: that the fact that the nester does not strangulate is not correct is wrong.; int6 & int7 -> int8: that the fact that the nester is not evaporative and is not hospitable does not hold is right.; int5 & int8 -> int9: the nester is not fibrocalcific.; int4 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: the fact that the paw is a devotion but it does not unionize subordinating is not right.; int11 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
the bantamweight sneers baneberry.
$hypothesis$ = the bantamweight sneers baneberry. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a pickings then that it unionizes subordinating and does not sneer baneberry is wrong. sent2: the paw either does strangulate or is not a pickings or both. sent3: something is not fibrocalcific if the fact that it is not evaporative and it is not hospitable is wrong. sent4: that the nester is choreographic and weedless is not true. sent5: the bantamweight sneers baneberry if the Austrian is not variable. sent6: something is a kind of a pickings if it is a devotion and it does not unionize subordinating. sent7: if the paw is a pickings the Austrian either is a pickings or is not a kind of a variable or both. sent8: if the Austrian is not a kind of a devotion then the fact that it does not unionize subordinating and it is not variable is not right. sent9: that the nester does not strangulate is not wrong if that it is choreographic and weedless does not hold. sent10: the Austrian is not a pickings if that it is invariable and it is not a kind of a devotion is wrong. sent11: the Austrian does not strangulate. sent12: that something is not evaporative and is not hospitable is not true if the fact that it does not strangulate hold. sent13: the nester is fibrocalcific if the Austrian is a pickings and/or it is not variable. sent14: if the fact that the fact that the paw is a devotion but it does not unionize subordinating is not true is not incorrect the bantamweight does not sneer baneberry. sent15: the nester is not a pickings if the paw does strangulate. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: if the paw is a devotion but it does not unionize subordinating then it is a pickings.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the paw is a devotion that does not unionize subordinating.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the paw is a kind of a pickings.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: either the Austrian is a kind of a pickings or it is not a kind of a variable or both.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the nester is fibrocalcific.; sent3 -> int5: if the fact that the nester is a kind of non-evaporative thing that is not hospitable is wrong it is not fibrocalcific.; sent12 -> int6: the fact that the nester is both not evaporative and not hospitable does not hold if that it does not strangulate is true.; sent9 & sent4 -> int7: that the fact that the nester does not strangulate is not correct is wrong.; int6 & int7 -> int8: that the fact that the nester is not evaporative and is not hospitable does not hold is right.; int5 & int8 -> int9: the nester is not fibrocalcific.; int4 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: the fact that the paw is a devotion but it does not unionize subordinating is not right.; int11 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__