the fondler does emote inhospitableness.
sent1: the exudation is a Schubert if the acetabulum is a kind of a painfulness. sent2: if the acetabulum either is not agonistic or canopies or both the Incarnation is not agonistic. sent3: if the fact that the gastrin does drink truck but it is not a angiocarp does not hold then the fondler emotes inhospitableness. sent4: something is agonistic if it is a kind of a Schubert. sent5: if the Incarnation is not potent then the acetabulum is a painfulness and/or it is a kind of a canthus. sent6: if that something is agonistic and it drinks truck is not right then it is not agonistic. sent7: the gastrin is not a angiocarp if there exists something such that that it does not clench and it is a boldness does not hold. sent8: if the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood the fact that it drinks truck and it is a angiocarp does not hold. sent9: if there is something such that it does denationalize illness then that the Permalloy does not clench but it is a boldness is not correct. sent10: the fact that the gastrin is a kind of a Schubert but it does not drink truck is not right. sent11: if the gastrin is not a kind of a angiocarp that the quetzal does not denationalize blackwood and is agonistic is not true. sent12: that the gastrin does drink truck and is a angiocarp is incorrect. sent13: the exudation is a kind of a Schubert if the acetabulum is a canthus. sent14: there exists something such that that it denationalizes illness hold. sent15: if the gastrin is a angiocarp then the fondler emotes inhospitableness. sent16: if the fact that the Incarnation is a kind of a Schubert and is not potent is not right then the fondler is not potent. sent17: if something is not potent then it does not emote inhospitableness. sent18: the fact that the quetzal is a canopy that is agonistic is not correct if the exudation is agonistic. sent19: if the gastrin does not drink truck then that it is a canthus and it is potent is incorrect. sent20: that the quetzal is not a canopy but agonistic is not correct if the fact that the exudation is agonistic hold. sent21: the fact that something is a Schubert but it is not potent is not true if it is not agonistic. sent22: the fact that the quetzal canopies and is agonistic does not hold. sent23: the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood if that the quetzal is not a canopy but agonistic is not right. sent24: that something drinks truck and it is a kind of a angiocarp is not true if it does not denationalize blackwood. sent25: that the Incarnation is not potent is not false. sent26: the fact that something does drink truck and is not a angiocarp does not hold if it does not denationalize blackwood.
sent5 & sent25 -> int1: the fact that the acetabulum is a kind of a painfulness and/or it is a kind of a canthus is true.; int1 & sent1 & sent13 -> int2: the exudation is a kind of a Schubert.; sent4 -> int3: the exudation is agonistic if it is a Schubert.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the exudation is agonistic.; int4 & sent20 -> int5: the fact that the quetzal is not a canopy but it is agonistic is not correct.; int5 & sent23 -> int6: that the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood is correct.; sent26 -> int7: if the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood the fact that it does drink truck and it is not a angiocarp is false.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the gastrin drinks truck and is not a kind of a angiocarp does not hold.; int8 & sent3 -> hypothesis;
the fondler does not emote inhospitableness.
sent17 -> int9: if the fondler is not potent then it does not emote inhospitableness.; sent21 -> int10: the fact that the Incarnation is both a Schubert and not potent does not hold if that it is not agonistic is right.; sent6 -> int11: if the fact that the acetabulum is agonistic and it drinks truck is false the fact that it is not agonistic is not incorrect.; sent14 & sent9 -> int12: the fact that the Permalloy does not clench and is a boldness is not correct.; int12 -> int13: the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it does not clench and it is a kind of a boldness is false is true.; int13 & sent7 -> int14: the gastrin is not a angiocarp.; sent11 & int14 -> int15: that the quetzal does not denationalize blackwood but it is agonistic does not hold.; int15 -> int16: there is something such that the fact that it does not denationalize blackwood and it is agonistic is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the fondler does emote inhospitableness. ; $context$ = sent1: the exudation is a Schubert if the acetabulum is a kind of a painfulness. sent2: if the acetabulum either is not agonistic or canopies or both the Incarnation is not agonistic. sent3: if the fact that the gastrin does drink truck but it is not a angiocarp does not hold then the fondler emotes inhospitableness. sent4: something is agonistic if it is a kind of a Schubert. sent5: if the Incarnation is not potent then the acetabulum is a painfulness and/or it is a kind of a canthus. sent6: if that something is agonistic and it drinks truck is not right then it is not agonistic. sent7: the gastrin is not a angiocarp if there exists something such that that it does not clench and it is a boldness does not hold. sent8: if the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood the fact that it drinks truck and it is a angiocarp does not hold. sent9: if there is something such that it does denationalize illness then that the Permalloy does not clench but it is a boldness is not correct. sent10: the fact that the gastrin is a kind of a Schubert but it does not drink truck is not right. sent11: if the gastrin is not a kind of a angiocarp that the quetzal does not denationalize blackwood and is agonistic is not true. sent12: that the gastrin does drink truck and is a angiocarp is incorrect. sent13: the exudation is a kind of a Schubert if the acetabulum is a canthus. sent14: there exists something such that that it denationalizes illness hold. sent15: if the gastrin is a angiocarp then the fondler emotes inhospitableness. sent16: if the fact that the Incarnation is a kind of a Schubert and is not potent is not right then the fondler is not potent. sent17: if something is not potent then it does not emote inhospitableness. sent18: the fact that the quetzal is a canopy that is agonistic is not correct if the exudation is agonistic. sent19: if the gastrin does not drink truck then that it is a canthus and it is potent is incorrect. sent20: that the quetzal is not a canopy but agonistic is not correct if the fact that the exudation is agonistic hold. sent21: the fact that something is a Schubert but it is not potent is not true if it is not agonistic. sent22: the fact that the quetzal canopies and is agonistic does not hold. sent23: the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood if that the quetzal is not a canopy but agonistic is not right. sent24: that something drinks truck and it is a kind of a angiocarp is not true if it does not denationalize blackwood. sent25: that the Incarnation is not potent is not false. sent26: the fact that something does drink truck and is not a angiocarp does not hold if it does not denationalize blackwood. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 & sent25 -> int1: the fact that the acetabulum is a kind of a painfulness and/or it is a kind of a canthus is true.; int1 & sent1 & sent13 -> int2: the exudation is a kind of a Schubert.; sent4 -> int3: the exudation is agonistic if it is a Schubert.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the exudation is agonistic.; int4 & sent20 -> int5: the fact that the quetzal is not a canopy but it is agonistic is not correct.; int5 & sent23 -> int6: that the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood is correct.; sent26 -> int7: if the gastrin does not denationalize blackwood the fact that it does drink truck and it is not a angiocarp is false.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the gastrin drinks truck and is not a kind of a angiocarp does not hold.; int8 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__