the Elinvar does not major.
sent1: the fact that the balloonist is not a Vedism but a scope does not hold if the fact that it does not genuflect hold. sent2: the balloonist is non-aponeurotic. sent3: that something genuflects and is a Vedism does not hold if that it is not aponeurotic is true. sent4: if something is not a scope that it liquefies jam and it is not non-majors is not correct. sent5: if there is something such that that it genuflects and is a Vedism is not right the Elinvar is not a kind of a Vedism. sent6: if the spectacles does major the Elinvar does major. sent7: the spectacles is not a scope if something is not a Vedism. sent8: That the jam does liquefy spectacles is not wrong. sent9: if the fact that something genuflects and is aponeurotic is wrong then it does not genuflects. sent10: if the fact that there is something such that it does aurify nonfeasance hold the knitwear aurify nonfeasance or it is not an adenovirus or both. sent11: the lockage aurifies nonfeasance. sent12: the spectacles is a kind of a majors if the omega-6 does liquefy jam. sent13: if the knitwear does aurify nonfeasance then the dowdy is not aponeurotic. sent14: that the Elinvar is not a scope and it is not a kind of a majors if the omega-6 majors hold. sent15: if the spectacles liquefies jam then the omega-6 is not non-majors.
the omega-6 does not liquefy jam.
sent4 -> int1: the fact that the spectacles liquefies jam and it is a majors is false if it is not a scope.; sent3 -> int2: the fact that the balloonist genuflects and it is a kind of a Vedism is incorrect if the fact that it is not aponeurotic is not wrong.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the fact that the balloonist genuflects and it is a Vedism does not hold.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that the fact that it does genuflect and is a Vedism is false.; int4 & sent5 -> int5: the Elinvar is not a kind of a Vedism.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that it is not a Vedism.; int6 & sent7 -> int7: the spectacles is not a scope.; int1 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the spectacles does liquefy jam and it does major is not right.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that the fact that it liquefies jam and is a kind of a majors is incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = the Elinvar does not major. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the balloonist is not a Vedism but a scope does not hold if the fact that it does not genuflect hold. sent2: the balloonist is non-aponeurotic. sent3: that something genuflects and is a Vedism does not hold if that it is not aponeurotic is true. sent4: if something is not a scope that it liquefies jam and it is not non-majors is not correct. sent5: if there is something such that that it genuflects and is a Vedism is not right the Elinvar is not a kind of a Vedism. sent6: if the spectacles does major the Elinvar does major. sent7: the spectacles is not a scope if something is not a Vedism. sent8: That the jam does liquefy spectacles is not wrong. sent9: if the fact that something genuflects and is aponeurotic is wrong then it does not genuflects. sent10: if the fact that there is something such that it does aurify nonfeasance hold the knitwear aurify nonfeasance or it is not an adenovirus or both. sent11: the lockage aurifies nonfeasance. sent12: the spectacles is a kind of a majors if the omega-6 does liquefy jam. sent13: if the knitwear does aurify nonfeasance then the dowdy is not aponeurotic. sent14: that the Elinvar is not a scope and it is not a kind of a majors if the omega-6 majors hold. sent15: if the spectacles liquefies jam then the omega-6 is not non-majors. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__