the tequila is a celestite if the pheasant's-eye is a manila.
sent1: the fact that the tequila defrosts and it is a kind of a contrariness is not true if the checker does not defrosts. sent2: if the checker does not defrost then the fact that the tequila defrost but it is not a kind of a contrariness is not true. sent3: the fact that the thurifer unfurls and deduces Chickasaw is not correct. sent4: the tequila does not checkmate Girard. sent5: the pheasant's-eye is not a kind of a Simon. sent6: if the pheasant's-eye is not a Simon the ramie does not checkmate horizontality. sent7: the tequila does urge. sent8: the checker is not a contrariness. sent9: the fact that the pheasant's-eye is both an urge and not a Simon does not hold if the ramie does not urge. sent10: if that the tequila defrosts but it is not a contrariness is not correct it is a celestite. sent11: if the ramie is a kind of a Simon that is a Acrostichum then the checker does not defrost. sent12: that the pheasant's-eye is a Acrostichum and it is a manila is right. sent13: the tequila is clean. sent14: if the pheasant's-eye does not defrost and is not a Acrostichum then it is a manila. sent15: if the tequila is not an urge the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality and it does not defrost. sent16: the pit is not cyclic and is not a celestite. sent17: the ramie is a kind of a speciousness. sent18: the hairgrip is not a switcher and it does not checkmate horizontality. sent19: the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality. sent20: the fact that the pheasant's-eye does not defrost is not incorrect. sent21: the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality and is not an urge if the ramie is not a kind of a Simon. sent22: the ramie is a kind of a Acrostichum.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ramie is not a Simon.; sent21 & assump1 -> int1: the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality and it does not urge.;
$hypothesis$ = the tequila is a celestite if the pheasant's-eye is a manila. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the tequila defrosts and it is a kind of a contrariness is not true if the checker does not defrosts. sent2: if the checker does not defrost then the fact that the tequila defrost but it is not a kind of a contrariness is not true. sent3: the fact that the thurifer unfurls and deduces Chickasaw is not correct. sent4: the tequila does not checkmate Girard. sent5: the pheasant's-eye is not a kind of a Simon. sent6: if the pheasant's-eye is not a Simon the ramie does not checkmate horizontality. sent7: the tequila does urge. sent8: the checker is not a contrariness. sent9: the fact that the pheasant's-eye is both an urge and not a Simon does not hold if the ramie does not urge. sent10: if that the tequila defrosts but it is not a contrariness is not correct it is a celestite. sent11: if the ramie is a kind of a Simon that is a Acrostichum then the checker does not defrost. sent12: that the pheasant's-eye is a Acrostichum and it is a manila is right. sent13: the tequila is clean. sent14: if the pheasant's-eye does not defrost and is not a Acrostichum then it is a manila. sent15: if the tequila is not an urge the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality and it does not defrost. sent16: the pit is not cyclic and is not a celestite. sent17: the ramie is a kind of a speciousness. sent18: the hairgrip is not a switcher and it does not checkmate horizontality. sent19: the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality. sent20: the fact that the pheasant's-eye does not defrost is not incorrect. sent21: the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality and is not an urge if the ramie is not a kind of a Simon. sent22: the ramie is a kind of a Acrostichum. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ramie is not a Simon.; sent21 & assump1 -> int1: the pheasant's-eye does not checkmate horizontality and it does not urge.; __UNKNOWN__