the ware is not a bootleg.
sent1: the fact that the fact that the Cotswolds is not presocratic and it is not idiomatic is not right if the Cotswolds does open betterment is correct. sent2: a non-distributive thing is a bootleg and is presocratic. sent3: if the fact that the part-owner cambers Ursidae and it is distributive is incorrect it is not etiological. sent4: the panelist is presocratic and it is macroeconomics. sent5: the part-owner is a bootleg and it does camber Ursidae. sent6: if the fact that the Cotswolds is both not presocratic and not idiomatic is incorrect it is not distributive. sent7: if something is a squirter and does not truck stepper then it cambers Ursidae. sent8: the ceibo opens adhocracy. sent9: the pollutant is not presocratic if the Cotswolds is presocratic and it is distributive. sent10: if the part-owner is not etiological then the fact that the ware does not bootleg is right. sent11: that the anarchist does not truck stepper is right. sent12: if the Cotswolds opens betterment the fact that it is presocratic thing that is not idiomatic is wrong. sent13: something is non-etiological but it is a kind of a fence if it is not a lather. sent14: if the anarchist is a kind of non-etiological thing that cambers Ursidae then the part-owner is idiomatic. sent15: if the part-owner does not camber Ursidae then it is not etiological. sent16: that the Cotswolds is not non-presocratic and not idiomatic is not right. sent17: the Cotswolds is distributive if the fact that the part-owner is idiomatic is correct. sent18: the BWR is a squirter if there exists something such that the fact that it is a ictodosaur and/or it is not a bootlegging is not correct. sent19: the part-owner opens betterment if that the Cotswolds is not distributive is not false. sent20: that the part-owner cambers Ursidae and is distributive is incorrect if the Cotswolds is not distributive. sent21: if the pollutant is not a exocrine the Cotswolds opens betterment and is a checksum. sent22: that the ceibo is a ictodosaur and/or it is not a bootlegging is wrong if it opens adhocracy. sent23: the insulant is not distributive. sent24: the ware is etiological. sent25: the anarchist is a squirter if the BWR is a kind of a squirter. sent26: the pollutant is not a exocrine. sent27: the tricot does not open betterment.
sent21 & sent26 -> int1: the Cotswolds opens betterment and is a checksum.; int1 -> int2: the Cotswolds opens betterment.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the fact that the Cotswolds is both non-presocratic and not idiomatic is not incorrect does not hold.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the Cotswolds is not distributive.; int4 & sent20 -> int5: that the part-owner cambers Ursidae and it is distributive is incorrect.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the part-owner is not etiological.; int6 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the insulant is a bootleg that does grizzle.
sent2 -> int7: the insulant is a bootleg and is presocratic if it is not distributive.; int7 & sent23 -> int8: the insulant bootlegs and is presocratic.; int8 -> int9: the insulant does bootleg.;
$hypothesis$ = the ware is not a bootleg. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that the Cotswolds is not presocratic and it is not idiomatic is not right if the Cotswolds does open betterment is correct. sent2: a non-distributive thing is a bootleg and is presocratic. sent3: if the fact that the part-owner cambers Ursidae and it is distributive is incorrect it is not etiological. sent4: the panelist is presocratic and it is macroeconomics. sent5: the part-owner is a bootleg and it does camber Ursidae. sent6: if the fact that the Cotswolds is both not presocratic and not idiomatic is incorrect it is not distributive. sent7: if something is a squirter and does not truck stepper then it cambers Ursidae. sent8: the ceibo opens adhocracy. sent9: the pollutant is not presocratic if the Cotswolds is presocratic and it is distributive. sent10: if the part-owner is not etiological then the fact that the ware does not bootleg is right. sent11: that the anarchist does not truck stepper is right. sent12: if the Cotswolds opens betterment the fact that it is presocratic thing that is not idiomatic is wrong. sent13: something is non-etiological but it is a kind of a fence if it is not a lather. sent14: if the anarchist is a kind of non-etiological thing that cambers Ursidae then the part-owner is idiomatic. sent15: if the part-owner does not camber Ursidae then it is not etiological. sent16: that the Cotswolds is not non-presocratic and not idiomatic is not right. sent17: the Cotswolds is distributive if the fact that the part-owner is idiomatic is correct. sent18: the BWR is a squirter if there exists something such that the fact that it is a ictodosaur and/or it is not a bootlegging is not correct. sent19: the part-owner opens betterment if that the Cotswolds is not distributive is not false. sent20: that the part-owner cambers Ursidae and is distributive is incorrect if the Cotswolds is not distributive. sent21: if the pollutant is not a exocrine the Cotswolds opens betterment and is a checksum. sent22: that the ceibo is a ictodosaur and/or it is not a bootlegging is wrong if it opens adhocracy. sent23: the insulant is not distributive. sent24: the ware is etiological. sent25: the anarchist is a squirter if the BWR is a kind of a squirter. sent26: the pollutant is not a exocrine. sent27: the tricot does not open betterment. ; $proof$ = 
sent21 & sent26 -> int1: the Cotswolds opens betterment and is a checksum.; int1 -> int2: the Cotswolds opens betterment.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the fact that the Cotswolds is both non-presocratic and not idiomatic is not incorrect does not hold.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the Cotswolds is not distributive.; int4 & sent20 -> int5: that the part-owner cambers Ursidae and it is distributive is incorrect.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the part-owner is not etiological.; int6 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__