there is something such that the fact that it does not braid Hoyle and it is obedient is not true.
sent1: that the epicanthus is lax thing that is not forgettable is not true. sent2: that the calm does braid Hoyle and it is obedient does not hold. sent3: the epicanthus is lax. sent4: if the semiprofessional is nonruminant then the epicanthus is lax. sent5: the fact that either the semiprofessional does not braid Hoyle or it does not breakfast portal or both if the semiprofessional is unprofessional is not wrong. sent6: that the calm does not braid Hoyle and is not disobedient is not correct if the semiprofessional is a Wouk. sent7: there exists something such that that it braids Hoyle and is obedient is incorrect. sent8: if something is a kind of an antigen and is not nonruminant it is calcitic. sent9: that the epicanthus is not nonruminant but it is a Wouk hold. sent10: the semiprofessional either is ruminant or is a kind of an antigen or both. sent11: something does not braid Hoyle and is obedient. sent12: either the semiprofessional is nonruminant or it is not an antigen or both. sent13: the semiprofessional is unprofessional if the fact that it is both Mycenaean and unprofessional does not hold. sent14: that the semiprofessional is Mycenaean but it is not unprofessional is not true. sent15: the semiprofessional is a Wouk if it does breakfast portal. sent16: the epicanthus does not braid Hoyle or it is not a trapeze or both. sent17: if the semiprofessional is nonruminant then the epicanthus is both lax and not forgettable.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the semiprofessional is nonruminant.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the epicanthus is lax but not forgettable.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the semiprofessional is ruminant is not wrong.; int3 -> int4: the semiprofessional is not nonruminant and/or it is not an antigen.;
the epicanthus is calcitic and does not braid Hoyle.
sent8 -> int5: if the epicanthus is an antigen but it is not nonruminant then it is calcitic.; sent9 -> int6: the epicanthus is not nonruminant.; sent13 & sent14 -> int7: the fact that the semiprofessional is unprofessional is correct.; sent5 & int7 -> int8: either the semiprofessional does not braid Hoyle or it does not breakfast portal or both.; int8 -> int9: either something does not braid Hoyle or it does not breakfast portal or both.;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that the fact that it does not braid Hoyle and it is obedient is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that the epicanthus is lax thing that is not forgettable is not true. sent2: that the calm does braid Hoyle and it is obedient does not hold. sent3: the epicanthus is lax. sent4: if the semiprofessional is nonruminant then the epicanthus is lax. sent5: the fact that either the semiprofessional does not braid Hoyle or it does not breakfast portal or both if the semiprofessional is unprofessional is not wrong. sent6: that the calm does not braid Hoyle and is not disobedient is not correct if the semiprofessional is a Wouk. sent7: there exists something such that that it braids Hoyle and is obedient is incorrect. sent8: if something is a kind of an antigen and is not nonruminant it is calcitic. sent9: that the epicanthus is not nonruminant but it is a Wouk hold. sent10: the semiprofessional either is ruminant or is a kind of an antigen or both. sent11: something does not braid Hoyle and is obedient. sent12: either the semiprofessional is nonruminant or it is not an antigen or both. sent13: the semiprofessional is unprofessional if the fact that it is both Mycenaean and unprofessional does not hold. sent14: that the semiprofessional is Mycenaean but it is not unprofessional is not true. sent15: the semiprofessional is a Wouk if it does breakfast portal. sent16: the epicanthus does not braid Hoyle or it is not a trapeze or both. sent17: if the semiprofessional is nonruminant then the epicanthus is both lax and not forgettable. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the semiprofessional is nonruminant.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the epicanthus is lax but not forgettable.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the semiprofessional is ruminant is not wrong.; int3 -> int4: the semiprofessional is not nonruminant and/or it is not an antigen.; __UNKNOWN__