the eucalyptus is not a kind of an atheist.
sent1: that if the fact that something is a Bunsen is true it is a kind of a laudanum is right. sent2: the bucket is an atheist. sent3: if there exists something such that it proof reads the fact that the eucalyptus does not subject readership but it does optimize is not correct. sent4: if something does not optimize and subjects readership it proof reads. sent5: the eucalyptus is a kind of a mole that is unapologetic. sent6: the eucalyptus is unportable. sent7: the patchwork is a macrocephaly or it is not a kind of a non-engagement or both if something does subject Sorex. sent8: if that the fact that the photojournalism does not subject pilocarpine and is atheist is not false is incorrect it deprives transportation. sent9: that the bat is a floccule and is a macrocephaly is not correct. sent10: something is an atheist if it does proofread. sent11: if something that is a non-engagement is a macrocephaly it is not an atheist. sent12: if the fact that something does not subject readership and does optimize is false it is a non-engagement. sent13: the eucalyptus is a non-engagement if it subjects readership. sent14: the eucalyptus cutinizes degradation. sent15: the eucalyptus is not a corselet if it deprives patchwork and it is a kind of a non-engagement. sent16: there is something such that it does subject Sorex. sent17: there exists something such that it does proofread. sent18: the fact that the pilocarpine does deprive seeking and it subjects Globicephala is wrong. sent19: if the eucalyptus is a kind of a Dane and it is an atheist then it does not narrate permanganate.
sent17 & sent3 -> int1: that that the eucalyptus does not subject readership but it optimizes is true does not hold.; sent12 -> int2: the eucalyptus is a non-engagement if that the fact that it does not subject readership and it does optimize is true does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the eucalyptus is a non-engagement.; sent11 -> int4: if the eucalyptus is a non-engagement and a macrocephaly then it is not an atheist.;
the eucalyptus is a kind of an atheist.
sent10 -> int5: the eucalyptus is an atheist if it does proofread.; sent4 -> int6: if the eucalyptus does not optimize and does subject readership it proof reads.; sent16 & sent7 -> int7: either the patchwork is a macrocephaly or it is not a non-engagement or both.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it is a kind of a macrocephaly or it is not a non-engagement or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the eucalyptus is not a kind of an atheist. ; $context$ = sent1: that if the fact that something is a Bunsen is true it is a kind of a laudanum is right. sent2: the bucket is an atheist. sent3: if there exists something such that it proof reads the fact that the eucalyptus does not subject readership but it does optimize is not correct. sent4: if something does not optimize and subjects readership it proof reads. sent5: the eucalyptus is a kind of a mole that is unapologetic. sent6: the eucalyptus is unportable. sent7: the patchwork is a macrocephaly or it is not a kind of a non-engagement or both if something does subject Sorex. sent8: if that the fact that the photojournalism does not subject pilocarpine and is atheist is not false is incorrect it deprives transportation. sent9: that the bat is a floccule and is a macrocephaly is not correct. sent10: something is an atheist if it does proofread. sent11: if something that is a non-engagement is a macrocephaly it is not an atheist. sent12: if the fact that something does not subject readership and does optimize is false it is a non-engagement. sent13: the eucalyptus is a non-engagement if it subjects readership. sent14: the eucalyptus cutinizes degradation. sent15: the eucalyptus is not a corselet if it deprives patchwork and it is a kind of a non-engagement. sent16: there is something such that it does subject Sorex. sent17: there exists something such that it does proofread. sent18: the fact that the pilocarpine does deprive seeking and it subjects Globicephala is wrong. sent19: if the eucalyptus is a kind of a Dane and it is an atheist then it does not narrate permanganate. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 & sent3 -> int1: that that the eucalyptus does not subject readership but it optimizes is true does not hold.; sent12 -> int2: the eucalyptus is a non-engagement if that the fact that it does not subject readership and it does optimize is true does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the eucalyptus is a non-engagement.; sent11 -> int4: if the eucalyptus is a non-engagement and a macrocephaly then it is not an atheist.; __UNKNOWN__