the fact that the potential is not a Ortega and it is non-ungulate is incorrect.
sent1: if something is not a kind of a Ortega and it is not a blastoma it does not taste absentmindedness. sent2: the absorption is not a flashlight if the fact that the jaw is not a blastoma and is non-Zionist is wrong. sent3: the toucanet does not gutter loupe. sent4: if the jaw does not gutter wear that it is both not a blastoma and Zionist is incorrect. sent5: if the mountaineer is a Ortega the fact that the fact that the potential is not a Ortega and not a ungulate is not false is wrong. sent6: the fact that the fact that the potential is both not a Ortega and a ungulate is incorrect hold if the mountaineer is a kind of a Ortega. sent7: if something is a flashlight then that it is not erythropoietic and it does not gutter relativity does not hold. sent8: if the toucanet is a flashlight then the potential is a flashlight. sent9: if something is polymeric it does taste absentmindedness. sent10: if the toucanet is not excrescent the absorption is a flashlight. sent11: the absorption is not a kind of a Ortega and is not a blastoma if the mountaineer is not a ungulate. sent12: that the potential is a Ortega but it is not a kind of a ungulate does not hold if the mountaineer is a Ortega. sent13: if the toucanet does not gutter loupe and is not sciatic then it is not excrescent. sent14: the toucanet is a kind of a Ortega. sent15: the toucanet is polymeric if it gutters loupe. sent16: if the jaw does not gutter wear then the fact that it is not a blastoma and is not a Zionist is false. sent17: the fact that the potential is a Ortega that is not ungulate is not right. sent18: if that something does not gutter loupe and is not sciatic does not hold then that it is polymeric is not wrong. sent19: if that the toucanet is not polymeric but it is excrescent is not correct the potential is a flashlight. sent20: The wear does not gutter jaw. sent21: the mountaineer is a kind of a Ortega if the toucanet does taste absentmindedness.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the toucanet does not gutter loupe and is non-sciatic.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the toucanet is not excrescent.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the absorption is a flashlight.; sent18 -> int3: the toucanet is polymeric if the fact that it does not gutter loupe and it is not sciatic is wrong.; sent9 -> int4: the toucanet does taste absentmindedness if it is polymeric.;
the fact that the potential is not erythropoietic and does not gutter relativity is not right.
sent7 -> int5: that the potential is non-erythropoietic thing that does not gutter relativity does not hold if it is a kind of a flashlight.; sent1 -> int6: the absorption does not taste absentmindedness if it is not a Ortega and it is not a blastoma.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the potential is not a Ortega and it is non-ungulate is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a Ortega and it is not a blastoma it does not taste absentmindedness. sent2: the absorption is not a flashlight if the fact that the jaw is not a blastoma and is non-Zionist is wrong. sent3: the toucanet does not gutter loupe. sent4: if the jaw does not gutter wear that it is both not a blastoma and Zionist is incorrect. sent5: if the mountaineer is a Ortega the fact that the fact that the potential is not a Ortega and not a ungulate is not false is wrong. sent6: the fact that the fact that the potential is both not a Ortega and a ungulate is incorrect hold if the mountaineer is a kind of a Ortega. sent7: if something is a flashlight then that it is not erythropoietic and it does not gutter relativity does not hold. sent8: if the toucanet is a flashlight then the potential is a flashlight. sent9: if something is polymeric it does taste absentmindedness. sent10: if the toucanet is not excrescent the absorption is a flashlight. sent11: the absorption is not a kind of a Ortega and is not a blastoma if the mountaineer is not a ungulate. sent12: that the potential is a Ortega but it is not a kind of a ungulate does not hold if the mountaineer is a Ortega. sent13: if the toucanet does not gutter loupe and is not sciatic then it is not excrescent. sent14: the toucanet is a kind of a Ortega. sent15: the toucanet is polymeric if it gutters loupe. sent16: if the jaw does not gutter wear then the fact that it is not a blastoma and is not a Zionist is false. sent17: the fact that the potential is a Ortega that is not ungulate is not right. sent18: if that something does not gutter loupe and is not sciatic does not hold then that it is polymeric is not wrong. sent19: if that the toucanet is not polymeric but it is excrescent is not correct the potential is a flashlight. sent20: The wear does not gutter jaw. sent21: the mountaineer is a kind of a Ortega if the toucanet does taste absentmindedness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the toucanet does not gutter loupe and is non-sciatic.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the toucanet is not excrescent.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the absorption is a flashlight.; sent18 -> int3: the toucanet is polymeric if the fact that it does not gutter loupe and it is not sciatic is wrong.; sent9 -> int4: the toucanet does taste absentmindedness if it is polymeric.; __UNKNOWN__