the simvastatin skimps and fears Lucite.
sent1: the commuter is not Argive if that the outboard does fear Snellen and does not fear outboard is not right. sent2: that the feast does not tamp inattention and is a swine does not hold if it fears proteome. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a paperwork. sent4: the fact that the feast tamps inattention and is a kind of a swine is wrong. sent5: that if the feast is not a Argive then the outboard is a swine and it is a Argive hold. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it does exploit and it is pyemic is not correct the depilatory does not exploit. sent7: if that something is not a kind of a crystallite and fears Snellen is not right then it is not a placket. sent8: if something is not lobeliaceous then the fact that it is a enterostomy and non-invertible is not right. sent9: the feast does not conventionalize invulnerability. sent10: something does not tamp inattention if it is not a swine. sent11: if that something does not tamp inattention but it is a swine is not correct that it does not fear Snellen is not incorrect. sent12: if the fact that something does not skydive and/or it does not conventionalize slap does not hold it is not lobeliaceous. sent13: the fact that the simvastatin skimps and it does fear Lucite is right if the salesclerk does not fear Lucite. sent14: The proteome does fear feast. sent15: if something is not a Pablum the fact that it exploits and is pyemic is not right. sent16: the fact that the salesclerk does not fear Lucite hold if the outboard does not fear outboard and is Argive. sent17: the pleasance is not floricultural if there exists something such that it is not a paperwork. sent18: the outboard does not fear outboard and is Argive if the commuter is a Argive. sent19: the outboard does not fear outboard. sent20: the fact that the simvastatin does not tamp inattention but it is Argive is incorrect if it does fear Lucite. sent21: if the fact that either something conventionalizes invulnerability or it does not conventionalize skinny or both is false then the fact that it fears Snellen is true. sent22: the outboard is not a swine if the fact that the salesclerk is a kind of a swine and/or it does fear proteome is not correct. sent23: if the commuter is not a kind of a Argive then the fact that the simvastatin skimps and fears Lucite is wrong. sent24: that the cycle is not a Pablum if there exists something such that that it is a enterostomy that is non-invertible is not right is true. sent25: the simvastatin skimps. sent26: the fact that the commuter is a kind of a Argive is true if there is something such that it either conventionalizes invulnerability or does not conventionalize skinny or both. sent27: the fact that the great does not skydive and/or does not conventionalize slap does not hold if there is something such that it is not floricultural.
sent21 -> int1: if that the feast does conventionalize invulnerability or does not conventionalize skinny or both is wrong it does fear Snellen.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the feast does conventionalize invulnerability and/or does not conventionalize skinny is wrong.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the feast fears Snellen.; sent11 -> int3: if that the feast does not tamp inattention and is a swine is wrong then that it does not fear Snellen is true.;
the fact that the simvastatin skimps and fears Lucite is incorrect.
sent10 -> int4: the outboard does not tamp inattention if it is not a swine.; sent15 -> int5: if the cycle is not a Pablum the fact that it exploits and it is not non-pyemic does not hold.; sent8 -> int6: if the great is not lobeliaceous that it is a enterostomy and it is non-invertible is incorrect.; sent12 -> int7: if that the great does not skydive or it does not conventionalize slap or both is not true it is not lobeliaceous.; sent3 & sent17 -> int8: the pleasance is non-floricultural.; int8 -> int9: something is not floricultural.; int9 & sent27 -> int10: that the great does not skydive and/or it does not conventionalize slap does not hold.; int7 & int10 -> int11: the great is not lobeliaceous.; int6 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the great is both a enterostomy and not non-non-invertible does not hold.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that that it is a kind of a enterostomy and is non-invertible does not hold.; int13 & sent24 -> int14: the cycle is not a Pablum.; int5 & int14 -> int15: the fact that the cycle does exploit and it is pyemic is wrong.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that the fact that it exploits and is pyemic is false.; int16 & sent6 -> int17: the depilatory does not exploit.; int17 -> int18: there exists something such that that it does not exploit is right.;
$hypothesis$ = the simvastatin skimps and fears Lucite. ; $context$ = sent1: the commuter is not Argive if that the outboard does fear Snellen and does not fear outboard is not right. sent2: that the feast does not tamp inattention and is a swine does not hold if it fears proteome. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a paperwork. sent4: the fact that the feast tamps inattention and is a kind of a swine is wrong. sent5: that if the feast is not a Argive then the outboard is a swine and it is a Argive hold. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it does exploit and it is pyemic is not correct the depilatory does not exploit. sent7: if that something is not a kind of a crystallite and fears Snellen is not right then it is not a placket. sent8: if something is not lobeliaceous then the fact that it is a enterostomy and non-invertible is not right. sent9: the feast does not conventionalize invulnerability. sent10: something does not tamp inattention if it is not a swine. sent11: if that something does not tamp inattention but it is a swine is not correct that it does not fear Snellen is not incorrect. sent12: if the fact that something does not skydive and/or it does not conventionalize slap does not hold it is not lobeliaceous. sent13: the fact that the simvastatin skimps and it does fear Lucite is right if the salesclerk does not fear Lucite. sent14: The proteome does fear feast. sent15: if something is not a Pablum the fact that it exploits and is pyemic is not right. sent16: the fact that the salesclerk does not fear Lucite hold if the outboard does not fear outboard and is Argive. sent17: the pleasance is not floricultural if there exists something such that it is not a paperwork. sent18: the outboard does not fear outboard and is Argive if the commuter is a Argive. sent19: the outboard does not fear outboard. sent20: the fact that the simvastatin does not tamp inattention but it is Argive is incorrect if it does fear Lucite. sent21: if the fact that either something conventionalizes invulnerability or it does not conventionalize skinny or both is false then the fact that it fears Snellen is true. sent22: the outboard is not a swine if the fact that the salesclerk is a kind of a swine and/or it does fear proteome is not correct. sent23: if the commuter is not a kind of a Argive then the fact that the simvastatin skimps and fears Lucite is wrong. sent24: that the cycle is not a Pablum if there exists something such that that it is a enterostomy that is non-invertible is not right is true. sent25: the simvastatin skimps. sent26: the fact that the commuter is a kind of a Argive is true if there is something such that it either conventionalizes invulnerability or does not conventionalize skinny or both. sent27: the fact that the great does not skydive and/or does not conventionalize slap does not hold if there is something such that it is not floricultural. ; $proof$ = 
sent21 -> int1: if that the feast does conventionalize invulnerability or does not conventionalize skinny or both is wrong it does fear Snellen.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the feast does conventionalize invulnerability and/or does not conventionalize skinny is wrong.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the feast fears Snellen.; sent11 -> int3: if that the feast does not tamp inattention and is a swine is wrong then that it does not fear Snellen is true.; __UNKNOWN__