the I-beam is not an oblate.
sent1: if something is not non-topping the fact that it is not azotic and/or it is a Hoheria is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that that it is a callithump and it is a kind of a Yoruba is false. sent3: the oyster-fish does not criticize fact. sent4: if something is a kind of a quail it finalizes supermodel. sent5: if there is something such that it does criticize fact and it is not a kind of a juvenile then the I-beam is a kind of a switchblade. sent6: if the fact that something does criticize fact but it is not juvenile does not hold the fact that it does not criticize fact is not incorrect. sent7: if something criticizes lay then the oyster-fish does not criticize fact and it is not juvenile. sent8: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Rwandan and it is a kind of a broker-dealer. sent9: something is a kind of an oblate if that it is not a kind of an oblate and does criticize lay does not hold. sent10: something does not uphold medicine and it is not haemophilic if it criticizes lay. sent11: the oyster-fish finalizes earth-god. sent12: something does not criticize fact and is juvenile. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is a callithump and is a Yoruba is not correct then the adventurer does arch. sent14: the fact that something is a kind of non-topping thing that does not criticize oxycephaly is not true if it does arch. sent15: if something does criticize lay then the oyster-fish does not criticize fact. sent16: if the I-beam is a kind of a switchblade it is azotic. sent17: the I-beam is a switchblade if there exists something such that it does not criticize fact and it is not juvenile. sent18: if something is a switchblade then it is azotic. sent19: something is not oblate but azotic if it is a switchblade. sent20: if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-topping thing that does not criticize oxycephaly is wrong then the oyster-fish does topping. sent21: if that something is not a switchblade hold then the fact that it criticizes fact and is not a kind of a juvenile does not hold. sent22: if something does not criticize fact then the fact that it is not oblate and it criticizes lay is wrong.
sent19 -> int1: if the fact that the I-beam is a switchblade is not incorrect it is not oblate and it is azotic.;
the oyster-fish does not uphold medicine and it is not haemophilic.
sent10 -> int2: if the oyster-fish does criticize lay then that it does not uphold medicine and it is not haemophilic is not wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the I-beam is not an oblate. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-topping the fact that it is not azotic and/or it is a Hoheria is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that that it is a callithump and it is a kind of a Yoruba is false. sent3: the oyster-fish does not criticize fact. sent4: if something is a kind of a quail it finalizes supermodel. sent5: if there is something such that it does criticize fact and it is not a kind of a juvenile then the I-beam is a kind of a switchblade. sent6: if the fact that something does criticize fact but it is not juvenile does not hold the fact that it does not criticize fact is not incorrect. sent7: if something criticizes lay then the oyster-fish does not criticize fact and it is not juvenile. sent8: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Rwandan and it is a kind of a broker-dealer. sent9: something is a kind of an oblate if that it is not a kind of an oblate and does criticize lay does not hold. sent10: something does not uphold medicine and it is not haemophilic if it criticizes lay. sent11: the oyster-fish finalizes earth-god. sent12: something does not criticize fact and is juvenile. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is a callithump and is a Yoruba is not correct then the adventurer does arch. sent14: the fact that something is a kind of non-topping thing that does not criticize oxycephaly is not true if it does arch. sent15: if something does criticize lay then the oyster-fish does not criticize fact. sent16: if the I-beam is a kind of a switchblade it is azotic. sent17: the I-beam is a switchblade if there exists something such that it does not criticize fact and it is not juvenile. sent18: if something is a switchblade then it is azotic. sent19: something is not oblate but azotic if it is a switchblade. sent20: if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-topping thing that does not criticize oxycephaly is wrong then the oyster-fish does topping. sent21: if that something is not a switchblade hold then the fact that it criticizes fact and is not a kind of a juvenile does not hold. sent22: if something does not criticize fact then the fact that it is not oblate and it criticizes lay is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent19 -> int1: if the fact that the I-beam is a switchblade is not incorrect it is not oblate and it is azotic.; __UNKNOWN__