there exists something such that if it is altricial thing that is avifaunal it does not surmise fitment.
sent1: the fact that there exists something such that if it is altricial and it is avifaunal then it does surmise fitment hold. sent2: there exists something such that if it is economics and is mucosal then it does not restrain Lactarius. sent3: that the spicule does not lash is not false if it is a counterculture and it is a sandpit. sent4: there exists something such that if it outstares Eurydice and it is prodromal then it is not Anglo-catholic. sent5: if a altricial thing is avifaunal then it does not surmise fitment. sent6: the spicule is not a dinette if it is altricial thing that is a ceilidh. sent7: the spicule is not junior if it does surmise fitment and it is a conversion. sent8: something that does restrain Nubian and is a zither is not a limonite. sent9: if the consulate is alimentative and avifaunal it is not a butchery. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is a kind of a constructiveness and surmises consulate then it is not a baboon is correct. sent11: if something is a kind of a compunction that is a kind of a dinette the fact that it does not outstare Tsimshian is right. sent12: if the spicule is altricial and it is avifaunal then it does surmise fitment. sent13: if something that is altricial is avifaunal then it does surmise fitment. sent14: if the spicule fetters and it restrains Karloff then it is not avifaunal. sent15: if the hemp is a kind of altricial thing that is a kind of a front-runner it is not a ceilidh.
sent5 -> int1: if the spicule is both altricial and avifaunal the fact that it does not surmise fitment is correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is altricial thing that is avifaunal it does not surmise fitment. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that there exists something such that if it is altricial and it is avifaunal then it does surmise fitment hold. sent2: there exists something such that if it is economics and is mucosal then it does not restrain Lactarius. sent3: that the spicule does not lash is not false if it is a counterculture and it is a sandpit. sent4: there exists something such that if it outstares Eurydice and it is prodromal then it is not Anglo-catholic. sent5: if a altricial thing is avifaunal then it does not surmise fitment. sent6: the spicule is not a dinette if it is altricial thing that is a ceilidh. sent7: the spicule is not junior if it does surmise fitment and it is a conversion. sent8: something that does restrain Nubian and is a zither is not a limonite. sent9: if the consulate is alimentative and avifaunal it is not a butchery. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is a kind of a constructiveness and surmises consulate then it is not a baboon is correct. sent11: if something is a kind of a compunction that is a kind of a dinette the fact that it does not outstare Tsimshian is right. sent12: if the spicule is altricial and it is avifaunal then it does surmise fitment. sent13: if something that is altricial is avifaunal then it does surmise fitment. sent14: if the spicule fetters and it restrains Karloff then it is not avifaunal. sent15: if the hemp is a kind of altricial thing that is a kind of a front-runner it is not a ceilidh. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: if the spicule is both altricial and avifaunal the fact that it does not surmise fitment is correct.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__