the exorcist is not a Surrey and does not whistle outcrop.
sent1: if something does not dream blasted then that it does not smite discordance and it does smite Wilson is not right. sent2: something is not a kind of a marzipan and it is not a allogamy if the fact that it is not a wheel hold. sent3: the exorcist does not whistle outcrop. sent4: if the fact that something smites Pianola and is tentacular is not true it is not tentacular. sent5: that something is not a Surrey and does not whistle outcrop does not hold if it is not a kind of a Cyrillic. sent6: if the pargeting is not a marzipan and is not a allogamy then the outcrop is a allogamy. sent7: the fact that something does smite Pianola and is not non-tentacular does not hold if it is not adjudicative. sent8: if something is baboonish and is not a kind of a Lancaster then it does not dream blasted. sent9: something is a allogamy if it is a kind of non-biocatalytic thing that is an instinct. sent10: the outcrop is not a kind of a refractoriness. sent11: if the fact that the outcrop is not a wheel is correct then the fact that it does not smite discordance is not incorrect. sent12: the exorcist is an instinct. sent13: the parthenocarpy is not a kind of a marzipan if it is a Cyrillic. sent14: if the parthenocarpy is not a marzipan the fact that that the outcrop smites Wilson and it does wheel is correct does not hold. sent15: the parthenocarpy is not a kind of a marzipan if it is a allogamy and/or it is a Cyrillic. sent16: if there exists something such that that it does not smite discordance and it smites Wilson does not hold the pargeting does not wheel. sent17: the parthenocarpy is not biocatalytic. sent18: if the Gladstone does not equilibrate but it is adjudicative the antihistamine is not adjudicative. sent19: the Gladstone does not equilibrate but it is adjudicative. sent20: the parthenocarpy is not biocatalytic but it is an instinct. sent21: if something is not tentacular it is baboonish and is not a Lancaster. sent22: the exorcist does not whistle outcrop if the outcrop does not smite discordance. sent23: the exorcist is not a Surrey and it does not whistle outcrop if the outcrop does not smite discordance. sent24: the fact that the outcrop does not smite discordance if the fact that the outcrop does smite Wilson and is a wheel is wrong is not wrong.
sent9 -> int1: the parthenocarpy is a kind of a allogamy if it is non-biocatalytic and it is an instinct.; int1 & sent20 -> int2: that the parthenocarpy is a kind of a allogamy hold.; int2 -> int3: the parthenocarpy is a kind of a allogamy and/or it is not non-Cyrillic.; int3 & sent15 -> int4: the parthenocarpy is not a kind of a marzipan.; int4 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that the outcrop smites Wilson and does wheel is not correct.; int5 & sent24 -> int6: the outcrop does not smite discordance.; int6 & sent23 -> hypothesis;
that the exorcist is not a kind of a Surrey and it does not whistle outcrop is incorrect.
sent5 -> int7: if the exorcist is not a Cyrillic then the fact that it is not a Surrey and does not whistle outcrop is not correct.; sent2 -> int8: if the pargeting is not a kind of a wheel then it is not a marzipan and not a allogamy.; sent1 -> int9: if the antihistamine does not dream blasted that it does not smite discordance and smites Wilson is not correct.; sent8 -> int10: if the antihistamine is not non-baboonish and not a Lancaster then it does not dream blasted.; sent21 -> int11: the antihistamine is baboonish but it is not a Lancaster if it is not tentacular.; sent4 -> int12: the antihistamine is not tentacular if that it smites Pianola and it is tentacular is wrong.; sent7 -> int13: that the antihistamine does smite Pianola and is tentacular is incorrect if it is not adjudicative.; sent18 & sent19 -> int14: the antihistamine is non-adjudicative.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the fact that the antihistamine smites Pianola and it is tentacular is false.; int12 & int15 -> int16: the antihistamine is not tentacular.; int11 & int16 -> int17: that the antihistamine is baboonish but it is not a kind of a Lancaster is correct.; int10 & int17 -> int18: the antihistamine does not dream blasted.; int9 & int18 -> int19: the fact that the antihistamine does not smite discordance and does smite Wilson is not true.; int19 -> int20: there exists something such that that the fact that it does not smite discordance and it does smite Wilson is not wrong does not hold.; int20 & sent16 -> int21: the pargeting is not a wheel.; int8 & int21 -> int22: the pargeting is both not a marzipan and not a allogamy.; sent6 & int22 -> int23: the outcrop is a allogamy.; int23 -> int24: there exists something such that it is a allogamy.;
$hypothesis$ = the exorcist is not a Surrey and does not whistle outcrop. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not dream blasted then that it does not smite discordance and it does smite Wilson is not right. sent2: something is not a kind of a marzipan and it is not a allogamy if the fact that it is not a wheel hold. sent3: the exorcist does not whistle outcrop. sent4: if the fact that something smites Pianola and is tentacular is not true it is not tentacular. sent5: that something is not a Surrey and does not whistle outcrop does not hold if it is not a kind of a Cyrillic. sent6: if the pargeting is not a marzipan and is not a allogamy then the outcrop is a allogamy. sent7: the fact that something does smite Pianola and is not non-tentacular does not hold if it is not adjudicative. sent8: if something is baboonish and is not a kind of a Lancaster then it does not dream blasted. sent9: something is a allogamy if it is a kind of non-biocatalytic thing that is an instinct. sent10: the outcrop is not a kind of a refractoriness. sent11: if the fact that the outcrop is not a wheel is correct then the fact that it does not smite discordance is not incorrect. sent12: the exorcist is an instinct. sent13: the parthenocarpy is not a kind of a marzipan if it is a Cyrillic. sent14: if the parthenocarpy is not a marzipan the fact that that the outcrop smites Wilson and it does wheel is correct does not hold. sent15: the parthenocarpy is not a kind of a marzipan if it is a allogamy and/or it is a Cyrillic. sent16: if there exists something such that that it does not smite discordance and it smites Wilson does not hold the pargeting does not wheel. sent17: the parthenocarpy is not biocatalytic. sent18: if the Gladstone does not equilibrate but it is adjudicative the antihistamine is not adjudicative. sent19: the Gladstone does not equilibrate but it is adjudicative. sent20: the parthenocarpy is not biocatalytic but it is an instinct. sent21: if something is not tentacular it is baboonish and is not a Lancaster. sent22: the exorcist does not whistle outcrop if the outcrop does not smite discordance. sent23: the exorcist is not a Surrey and it does not whistle outcrop if the outcrop does not smite discordance. sent24: the fact that the outcrop does not smite discordance if the fact that the outcrop does smite Wilson and is a wheel is wrong is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> int1: the parthenocarpy is a kind of a allogamy if it is non-biocatalytic and it is an instinct.; int1 & sent20 -> int2: that the parthenocarpy is a kind of a allogamy hold.; int2 -> int3: the parthenocarpy is a kind of a allogamy and/or it is not non-Cyrillic.; int3 & sent15 -> int4: the parthenocarpy is not a kind of a marzipan.; int4 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that the outcrop smites Wilson and does wheel is not correct.; int5 & sent24 -> int6: the outcrop does not smite discordance.; int6 & sent23 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__