the tee is not a rain-wash.
sent1: if the hypochondriac is not a kind of a play and it does not quiver rescue the Sabine is not lively. sent2: the jerky is not syntagmatic if the fact that the sporangium is syntagmatic and it does compromise angiotensin is wrong. sent3: the tee is not a deference. sent4: something quivers shittah. sent5: if the tee is not syntagmatic then that it is not a kind of a rain-wash is not wrong. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it compromises Porzana is not false then the fact that the tee is syntagmatic and it compromises angiotensin is false. sent7: if something is syntagmatic the fact that the tee is lively and a dissidence is incorrect. sent8: the Khedive does not compromise angiotensin if it does not compromise Porzana. sent9: the appraiser does not compromise angiotensin if the fact that the Diegueno is a kind of an armpit and compromise angiotensin is not correct. sent10: that the tee quivers rescue and is a sorrow is not right. sent11: something does not quiver ectoparasite if that it is latitudinal and does feel is incorrect. sent12: if the fact that something is syntagmatic and it compromises angiotensin is not correct it is not a rain-wash. sent13: there exists something such that it is a yeoman. sent14: there is something such that it does compromise Porzana. sent15: if that the fact that the jerky does not compromise angiotensin but it is lively is not incorrect is not true it is not syntagmatic. sent16: if that the lionfish is a kind of a Ur that does compromise angiotensin is wrong then it is not adrenocortical. sent17: if there is something such that it is syntagmatic then the fact that the fumigant compromises airspace and it compromises IBDA-C does not hold. sent18: if the fact that something is a presentist and is polydactyl is not correct then it does not ambush undertow. sent19: the fact that something does not compromise angiotensin and is lively does not hold if it is an armpit. sent20: the fact that the Diegueno is an armpit and does compromise angiotensin is incorrect if the Sabine is not lively. sent21: a non-syntagmatic thing is not a rain-wash. sent22: the fact that the tee ambushes jerky and does compromise angiotensin is not true.
sent14 & sent6 -> int1: that that the tee is not non-syntagmatic and does compromise angiotensin is not true is not wrong.; sent12 -> int2: if the fact that the tee is syntagmatic and compromises angiotensin is not right then it is not a rain-wash.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;
the tee is a rain-wash.
sent19 -> int3: that the jerky does not compromise angiotensin and is lively is false if it is a kind of an armpit.;
$hypothesis$ = the tee is not a rain-wash. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hypochondriac is not a kind of a play and it does not quiver rescue the Sabine is not lively. sent2: the jerky is not syntagmatic if the fact that the sporangium is syntagmatic and it does compromise angiotensin is wrong. sent3: the tee is not a deference. sent4: something quivers shittah. sent5: if the tee is not syntagmatic then that it is not a kind of a rain-wash is not wrong. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it compromises Porzana is not false then the fact that the tee is syntagmatic and it compromises angiotensin is false. sent7: if something is syntagmatic the fact that the tee is lively and a dissidence is incorrect. sent8: the Khedive does not compromise angiotensin if it does not compromise Porzana. sent9: the appraiser does not compromise angiotensin if the fact that the Diegueno is a kind of an armpit and compromise angiotensin is not correct. sent10: that the tee quivers rescue and is a sorrow is not right. sent11: something does not quiver ectoparasite if that it is latitudinal and does feel is incorrect. sent12: if the fact that something is syntagmatic and it compromises angiotensin is not correct it is not a rain-wash. sent13: there exists something such that it is a yeoman. sent14: there is something such that it does compromise Porzana. sent15: if that the fact that the jerky does not compromise angiotensin but it is lively is not incorrect is not true it is not syntagmatic. sent16: if that the lionfish is a kind of a Ur that does compromise angiotensin is wrong then it is not adrenocortical. sent17: if there is something such that it is syntagmatic then the fact that the fumigant compromises airspace and it compromises IBDA-C does not hold. sent18: if the fact that something is a presentist and is polydactyl is not correct then it does not ambush undertow. sent19: the fact that something does not compromise angiotensin and is lively does not hold if it is an armpit. sent20: the fact that the Diegueno is an armpit and does compromise angiotensin is incorrect if the Sabine is not lively. sent21: a non-syntagmatic thing is not a rain-wash. sent22: the fact that the tee ambushes jerky and does compromise angiotensin is not true. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 & sent6 -> int1: that that the tee is not non-syntagmatic and does compromise angiotensin is not true is not wrong.; sent12 -> int2: if the fact that the tee is syntagmatic and compromises angiotensin is not right then it is not a rain-wash.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__