the gaddi is a Bosporus and a committedness.
sent1: there is something such that that it is not a Bosporus and it is a committedness is not true. sent2: if there exists something such that that it does not deck polytechnic and it is not a beat is not true then the gaddi is a Bosporus. sent3: if the galactose is not a pluperfect then the fact that that the carbamate does not deck polytechnic and is not a beat is false is correct. sent4: that if that something is not a kind of a barberry is not incorrect the fact that it is both a Bosporus and a committedness is false is right. sent5: the gaddi is apopemptic if there exists something such that it is a Bosporus. sent6: the custard is a kind of a barberry and it is anaclitic. sent7: the galactose is not a Bangkok. sent8: the love is not non-apopemptic. sent9: a non-exponential thing is both a committedness and apopemptic. sent10: that if the galactose does hoodoo deck-house either the galactose is not a kind of a Bangkok or it is not a pluperfect or both is correct. sent11: that if the galactose does deck polytechnic then the galactose hoodoos deck-house is not false. sent12: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a beat and not apopemptic is not true then the carbamate is an exponential. sent13: that the gaddi is a committedness hold if the love is a committedness. sent14: if the custard is anaclitic the rum is a kind of a Bangkok. sent15: the love is not an exponential. sent16: if the rum hoodoos deck-house and/or is a kind of a Bangkok the galactose is not a pluperfect.
sent6 -> int1: the custard is anaclitic.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: that the rum is a Bangkok is not wrong.; int2 -> int3: either the rum does hoodoo deck-house or it is a Bangkok or both.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: the fact that the galactose is not a kind of a pluperfect is not wrong.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the fact that the carbamate does not deck polytechnic and is not a kind of a beat is wrong.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it does not deck polytechnic and it is not a beat does not hold.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the gaddi is a Bosporus.; sent9 -> int8: if the fact that the love is non-exponential is not wrong then it is a kind of a committedness and it is apopemptic.; int8 & sent15 -> int9: the love is a committedness and it is apopemptic.; int9 -> int10: the love is a committedness.; sent13 & int10 -> int11: the gaddi is a kind of a committedness.; int7 & int11 -> hypothesis;
that the gaddi is a Bosporus and it is a committedness is not right.
sent4 -> int12: that the gaddi is both a Bosporus and a committedness is not true if it is not a barberry.;
$hypothesis$ = the gaddi is a Bosporus and a committedness. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not a Bosporus and it is a committedness is not true. sent2: if there exists something such that that it does not deck polytechnic and it is not a beat is not true then the gaddi is a Bosporus. sent3: if the galactose is not a pluperfect then the fact that that the carbamate does not deck polytechnic and is not a beat is false is correct. sent4: that if that something is not a kind of a barberry is not incorrect the fact that it is both a Bosporus and a committedness is false is right. sent5: the gaddi is apopemptic if there exists something such that it is a Bosporus. sent6: the custard is a kind of a barberry and it is anaclitic. sent7: the galactose is not a Bangkok. sent8: the love is not non-apopemptic. sent9: a non-exponential thing is both a committedness and apopemptic. sent10: that if the galactose does hoodoo deck-house either the galactose is not a kind of a Bangkok or it is not a pluperfect or both is correct. sent11: that if the galactose does deck polytechnic then the galactose hoodoos deck-house is not false. sent12: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a beat and not apopemptic is not true then the carbamate is an exponential. sent13: that the gaddi is a committedness hold if the love is a committedness. sent14: if the custard is anaclitic the rum is a kind of a Bangkok. sent15: the love is not an exponential. sent16: if the rum hoodoos deck-house and/or is a kind of a Bangkok the galactose is not a pluperfect. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: the custard is anaclitic.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: that the rum is a Bangkok is not wrong.; int2 -> int3: either the rum does hoodoo deck-house or it is a Bangkok or both.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: the fact that the galactose is not a kind of a pluperfect is not wrong.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the fact that the carbamate does not deck polytechnic and is not a kind of a beat is wrong.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it does not deck polytechnic and it is not a beat does not hold.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the gaddi is a Bosporus.; sent9 -> int8: if the fact that the love is non-exponential is not wrong then it is a kind of a committedness and it is apopemptic.; int8 & sent15 -> int9: the love is a committedness and it is apopemptic.; int9 -> int10: the love is a committedness.; sent13 & int10 -> int11: the gaddi is a kind of a committedness.; int7 & int11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__