the helvella is neoplastic.
sent1: the Methodists is not neoplastic if that it is a kind of psycholinguistic thing that is not a curette is not right. sent2: if something is a glasnost the fact that the Methodists is a then and is a kind of an immaturity is not correct. sent3: there exists something such that it does denaturalize Paterson. sent4: the helvella is a kind of a then if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of an immaturity and it is not non-neoplastic is not correct. sent5: that the helvella is neoplastic is correct if there exists something such that the fact that it is a then that is an immaturity is not correct. sent6: that the Methodists is both not non-psycholinguistic and not a curette is not true. sent7: if something is a glasnost it is not neoplastic. sent8: if something is not an immaturity then the fact that the helvella is neoplastic is right. sent9: that something ransoms is not wrong. sent10: there is something such that it is not a baddeleyite. sent11: a non-boskopoid thing is a curette that is an immaturity. sent12: if the squark is a then then the Methodists is a then. sent13: the fact that if the Methodists is not a kind of the battering then that the Methodists does not flinch but it is boskopoid is false hold. sent14: if the fact that something does not flinch but it is boskopoid is not right then it is not boskopoid. sent15: something that is not a then denaturalizes nautch and is a kind of a glasnost. sent16: the Methodists is not a battering. sent17: that the Methodists is neoplastic and it is a then does not hold.
the helvella is not neoplastic.
sent7 -> int1: if the helvella is a kind of a glasnost then it is not neoplastic.; sent11 -> int2: the Methodists is a kind of a curette and it is a kind of an immaturity if it is not boskopoid.; sent14 -> int3: if the fact that the Methodists does not flinch and is boskopoid does not hold then it is not boskopoid.; sent13 & sent16 -> int4: that the Methodists does not flinch but it is boskopoid is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Methodists is not boskopoid.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the Methodists is a kind of a curette and it is an immaturity.; int6 -> int7: that the Methodists is an immaturity is true.;
$hypothesis$ = the helvella is neoplastic. ; $context$ = sent1: the Methodists is not neoplastic if that it is a kind of psycholinguistic thing that is not a curette is not right. sent2: if something is a glasnost the fact that the Methodists is a then and is a kind of an immaturity is not correct. sent3: there exists something such that it does denaturalize Paterson. sent4: the helvella is a kind of a then if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of an immaturity and it is not non-neoplastic is not correct. sent5: that the helvella is neoplastic is correct if there exists something such that the fact that it is a then that is an immaturity is not correct. sent6: that the Methodists is both not non-psycholinguistic and not a curette is not true. sent7: if something is a glasnost it is not neoplastic. sent8: if something is not an immaturity then the fact that the helvella is neoplastic is right. sent9: that something ransoms is not wrong. sent10: there is something such that it is not a baddeleyite. sent11: a non-boskopoid thing is a curette that is an immaturity. sent12: if the squark is a then then the Methodists is a then. sent13: the fact that if the Methodists is not a kind of the battering then that the Methodists does not flinch but it is boskopoid is false hold. sent14: if the fact that something does not flinch but it is boskopoid is not right then it is not boskopoid. sent15: something that is not a then denaturalizes nautch and is a kind of a glasnost. sent16: the Methodists is not a battering. sent17: that the Methodists is neoplastic and it is a then does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__