the canafistola is not a mariner.
sent1: the Aertex is not microbial if there is something such that the fact that it does not crook Jat and it is logistics is not correct. sent2: that something is microbial but it is not a mariner is not right if it is a singular. sent3: the canafistola is not non-microbial. sent4: the fact that the grogram is not a kind of a singular hold. sent5: the sender is a kind of a Mountie and it is a kind of a five. sent6: if the biscuit is microbial it is logistics. sent7: the fact that the biscuit does not crook Jat but it is logistics is not true if that the grogram is not singular hold. sent8: the sensualist crooks Arapaho if it is a Fornax. sent9: the fact that that the fact that the sensualist is not a Fornax and is a mariner is not incorrect is not true is not wrong. sent10: the biscuit is not a kind of a singular if the Aertex is not a kind of a singular and/or it is not emmetropic. sent11: the sensualist ammoniates tidemark if the Aertex does not crook Arapaho. sent12: if the biscuit is not a kind of a erythroblast then it is a Fornax and it does not ammoniate tidemark. sent13: if the sensualist clanks voiceprint and crooks Arapaho then the canafistola is not a mariner. sent14: if that something is microbial but it is not a mariner does not hold then it is a mariner. sent15: the canafistola is a singular if the fact that the grogram is not a singular but it is not non-emmetropic is incorrect. sent16: if the grogram does decrescendo then that the loop is a kind of a decrescendo is not false. sent17: that the fact that the biscuit does not clank voiceprint and does not crook Arapaho hold does not hold if it is a kind of a Fornax. sent18: if there exists something such that that it is not microbial and is logistics is wrong the biscuit is not a Fornax. sent19: the sensualist does clank voiceprint and is emmetropic if the Aertex is not microbial. sent20: the grogram is a kind of a decrescendo if the biscuit is a decrescendo but not microbial. sent21: the biscuit crooks Jat and/or it is a kind of a singular. sent22: the fact that something that ammoniates tidemark does crook Arapaho is right. sent23: there is something such that the fact that it is a baa and is not a huffiness does not hold. sent24: the fact that the grogram is both not a singular and emmetropic does not hold if the biscuit does clank voiceprint. sent25: the fact that the fact that the sensualist is a singular that does clank voiceprint is not false does not hold. sent26: the sensualist does ammoniate tidemark or is a Fornax or both.
sent7 & sent4 -> int1: that the biscuit does not crook Jat but it is logistics is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it does not crook Jat and is logistics is false.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the Aertex is not microbial.; int3 & sent19 -> int4: the sensualist clanks voiceprint and is emmetropic.; int4 -> int5: the sensualist clanks voiceprint.; sent22 -> int6: if the sensualist ammoniates tidemark it crooks Arapaho.; sent26 & int6 & sent8 -> int7: the sensualist crooks Arapaho.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the sensualist does clank voiceprint and does crook Arapaho.; int8 & sent13 -> hypothesis;
the loop crooks Arapaho and/or it is a decrescendo.
sent25 -> int9: there exists something such that the fact that that it is singular and it does clank voiceprint is not incorrect is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the canafistola is not a mariner. ; $context$ = sent1: the Aertex is not microbial if there is something such that the fact that it does not crook Jat and it is logistics is not correct. sent2: that something is microbial but it is not a mariner is not right if it is a singular. sent3: the canafistola is not non-microbial. sent4: the fact that the grogram is not a kind of a singular hold. sent5: the sender is a kind of a Mountie and it is a kind of a five. sent6: if the biscuit is microbial it is logistics. sent7: the fact that the biscuit does not crook Jat but it is logistics is not true if that the grogram is not singular hold. sent8: the sensualist crooks Arapaho if it is a Fornax. sent9: the fact that that the fact that the sensualist is not a Fornax and is a mariner is not incorrect is not true is not wrong. sent10: the biscuit is not a kind of a singular if the Aertex is not a kind of a singular and/or it is not emmetropic. sent11: the sensualist ammoniates tidemark if the Aertex does not crook Arapaho. sent12: if the biscuit is not a kind of a erythroblast then it is a Fornax and it does not ammoniate tidemark. sent13: if the sensualist clanks voiceprint and crooks Arapaho then the canafistola is not a mariner. sent14: if that something is microbial but it is not a mariner does not hold then it is a mariner. sent15: the canafistola is a singular if the fact that the grogram is not a singular but it is not non-emmetropic is incorrect. sent16: if the grogram does decrescendo then that the loop is a kind of a decrescendo is not false. sent17: that the fact that the biscuit does not clank voiceprint and does not crook Arapaho hold does not hold if it is a kind of a Fornax. sent18: if there exists something such that that it is not microbial and is logistics is wrong the biscuit is not a Fornax. sent19: the sensualist does clank voiceprint and is emmetropic if the Aertex is not microbial. sent20: the grogram is a kind of a decrescendo if the biscuit is a decrescendo but not microbial. sent21: the biscuit crooks Jat and/or it is a kind of a singular. sent22: the fact that something that ammoniates tidemark does crook Arapaho is right. sent23: there is something such that the fact that it is a baa and is not a huffiness does not hold. sent24: the fact that the grogram is both not a singular and emmetropic does not hold if the biscuit does clank voiceprint. sent25: the fact that the fact that the sensualist is a singular that does clank voiceprint is not false does not hold. sent26: the sensualist does ammoniate tidemark or is a Fornax or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 & sent4 -> int1: that the biscuit does not crook Jat but it is logistics is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it does not crook Jat and is logistics is false.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the Aertex is not microbial.; int3 & sent19 -> int4: the sensualist clanks voiceprint and is emmetropic.; int4 -> int5: the sensualist clanks voiceprint.; sent22 -> int6: if the sensualist ammoniates tidemark it crooks Arapaho.; sent26 & int6 & sent8 -> int7: the sensualist crooks Arapaho.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the sensualist does clank voiceprint and does crook Arapaho.; int8 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__