the sling is not adenocarcinomatous.
sent1: if the phenol does not sediment apprenticed the smack is not a rejuvenation or tactical or both. sent2: that the sling is not autacoidal is not incorrect if the smack is autacoidal. sent3: the sling sediments legatee. sent4: something is not a rejuvenation if either it is not a rejuvenation or it is tactical or both. sent5: The apprenticed does sediment phenol. sent6: the phenol does sediment apprenticed. sent7: the sling is non-autacoidal. sent8: if the smack does sediment apprenticed and is autacoidal the phenol is not adenocarcinomatous. sent9: the phenol is not tactical if the sling is a rejuvenation and it is adenocarcinomatous. sent10: the sling does not sediment apprenticed. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that that it is not a floxuridine and it is not a bugginess hold is incorrect. sent12: if the smack is not non-autacoidal then the sling is a rejuvenation that is not non-autacoidal. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a floxuridine and it is a bugginess is false. sent14: there is something such that the fact that it is a floxuridine and it is not a bugginess does not hold. sent15: the phenol is a rejuvenation and not tactical if the sling is tactical. sent16: if there is something such that it is a bugginess the smack is autacoidal. sent17: if the phenol sediments apprenticed it is tactical.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the sling is adenocarcinomatous hold.; sent17 & sent6 -> int1: the phenol is tactical.;
the sling is adenocarcinomatous.
sent4 -> int2: the smack is not a rejuvenation if it is not a rejuvenation or it is tactical or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the sling is not adenocarcinomatous. ; $context$ = sent1: if the phenol does not sediment apprenticed the smack is not a rejuvenation or tactical or both. sent2: that the sling is not autacoidal is not incorrect if the smack is autacoidal. sent3: the sling sediments legatee. sent4: something is not a rejuvenation if either it is not a rejuvenation or it is tactical or both. sent5: The apprenticed does sediment phenol. sent6: the phenol does sediment apprenticed. sent7: the sling is non-autacoidal. sent8: if the smack does sediment apprenticed and is autacoidal the phenol is not adenocarcinomatous. sent9: the phenol is not tactical if the sling is a rejuvenation and it is adenocarcinomatous. sent10: the sling does not sediment apprenticed. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that that it is not a floxuridine and it is not a bugginess hold is incorrect. sent12: if the smack is not non-autacoidal then the sling is a rejuvenation that is not non-autacoidal. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a floxuridine and it is a bugginess is false. sent14: there is something such that the fact that it is a floxuridine and it is not a bugginess does not hold. sent15: the phenol is a rejuvenation and not tactical if the sling is tactical. sent16: if there is something such that it is a bugginess the smack is autacoidal. sent17: if the phenol sediments apprenticed it is tactical. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the sling is adenocarcinomatous hold.; sent17 & sent6 -> int1: the phenol is tactical.; __UNKNOWN__