the eburnation is a kind of a nit.
sent1: that the wolffish is not a Tamil and/or it is not nidicolous is not right. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is not Tamil and/or it is not nidicolous is wrong the eburnation is a nit. sent3: if that something is a nit that is not non-promissory is false then it is not a nit. sent4: that something is a fleabag but not chaffy is not correct if the fact that it is not a canella is correct. sent5: the presidio is not a kind of a canella if the Fothergilla is a canella and is a blind. sent6: the eburnation is a beep. sent7: there exists something such that it is endoscopic. sent8: something is nidicolous. sent9: there exists something such that it is a kind of a readjustment. sent10: either something is not a Tamil or it is not nidicolous or both. sent11: there is something such that it is a kind of a culdoscope. sent12: that something is a nit and is promissory is not true if that it is not a kind of a Omomyid is correct. sent13: the eburnation is a kind of a nit if there is something such that the fact that it is not a Tamil and/or it is nidicolous is not correct. sent14: the wolffish is nidicolous. sent15: something interposes centavo. sent16: there is something such that the fact that it either is a Tamil or is not nidicolous or both is not correct.
sent1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Tamil and/or it is not nidicolous is not true.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the eburnation is not a nit.
sent3 -> int2: if that the eburnation is a nit and it is promissory is not correct it is not a nit.; sent12 -> int3: if the eburnation is not a Omomyid then the fact that it is a nit and it is promissory is incorrect.; sent4 -> int4: that the presidio is a fleabag and is not chaffy is not correct if it is not a canella.;
$hypothesis$ = the eburnation is a kind of a nit. ; $context$ = sent1: that the wolffish is not a Tamil and/or it is not nidicolous is not right. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is not Tamil and/or it is not nidicolous is wrong the eburnation is a nit. sent3: if that something is a nit that is not non-promissory is false then it is not a nit. sent4: that something is a fleabag but not chaffy is not correct if the fact that it is not a canella is correct. sent5: the presidio is not a kind of a canella if the Fothergilla is a canella and is a blind. sent6: the eburnation is a beep. sent7: there exists something such that it is endoscopic. sent8: something is nidicolous. sent9: there exists something such that it is a kind of a readjustment. sent10: either something is not a Tamil or it is not nidicolous or both. sent11: there is something such that it is a kind of a culdoscope. sent12: that something is a nit and is promissory is not true if that it is not a kind of a Omomyid is correct. sent13: the eburnation is a kind of a nit if there is something such that the fact that it is not a Tamil and/or it is nidicolous is not correct. sent14: the wolffish is nidicolous. sent15: something interposes centavo. sent16: there is something such that the fact that it either is a Tamil or is not nidicolous or both is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Tamil and/or it is not nidicolous is not true.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__