the fact that there is something such that if it is not a whitewash but inexcusable then it does abdicate typography is true.
sent1: the fact that there is something such that if it is epigastric and it does fishtail then it is forcipate is not incorrect. sent2: if something is both not a whitewash and inexcusable the fact that it abdicates typography is not wrong. sent3: there is something such that if it is forcipate thing that tweedles compulsive it does tweedle euphuism. sent4: the allopurinol does abdicate typography if the fact that it does whitewash and it is inexcusable is not incorrect. sent5: there is something such that if it does whitewash and it is inexcusable then that it does abdicate typography is not wrong. sent6: if something does not surprise but it is biosystematic then that it does splutter moralization is not incorrect. sent7: if something that is not a Fabiana is anaplastic it splutters Chirico. sent8: something does abdicate typography if it is a whitewash and inexcusable. sent9: if the goby does not tweedle ascus and is a whitewash then it is an incest. sent10: if the brae is not cryonic and is Irish it does whitewash. sent11: that if the allopurinol is inexcusable and is the meandering then the allopurinol is a Agee is not incorrect. sent12: there is something such that if that it recombines brae and is a handsaw is not false it is a toe-in.
sent2 -> int1: if the allopurinol is not a whitewash and is inexcusable it does abdicate typography.; int1 -> hypothesis;
the allopurinol does splutter moralization if it does not surprise and is biosystematic.
sent6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not a whitewash but inexcusable then it does abdicate typography is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that there is something such that if it is epigastric and it does fishtail then it is forcipate is not incorrect. sent2: if something is both not a whitewash and inexcusable the fact that it abdicates typography is not wrong. sent3: there is something such that if it is forcipate thing that tweedles compulsive it does tweedle euphuism. sent4: the allopurinol does abdicate typography if the fact that it does whitewash and it is inexcusable is not incorrect. sent5: there is something such that if it does whitewash and it is inexcusable then that it does abdicate typography is not wrong. sent6: if something does not surprise but it is biosystematic then that it does splutter moralization is not incorrect. sent7: if something that is not a Fabiana is anaplastic it splutters Chirico. sent8: something does abdicate typography if it is a whitewash and inexcusable. sent9: if the goby does not tweedle ascus and is a whitewash then it is an incest. sent10: if the brae is not cryonic and is Irish it does whitewash. sent11: that if the allopurinol is inexcusable and is the meandering then the allopurinol is a Agee is not incorrect. sent12: there is something such that if that it recombines brae and is a handsaw is not false it is a toe-in. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: if the allopurinol is not a whitewash and is inexcusable it does abdicate typography.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__