the bombsight is a postdiluvian and is non-Julian.
sent1: something is not a kirsch if it snuffs parallelism. sent2: the architecture is not a kind of a laborer if something that is not a kind of a Xenicidae is not a stick. sent3: the bombsight is a kind of a postdiluvian. sent4: if the coney patronizes synapse then the bombsight does snuff parallelism. sent5: if the coney is axonal then the risk patronizes synapse. sent6: something is not a coziness and is a fieriness if it is not a laborer. sent7: something is a postdiluvian if it is not a kind of a kirsch. sent8: if the risk does not snuff booming but it rights gigot then it is not axonal. sent9: that something is a kind of a postdiluvian but it is not a Julian is correct if it is not a kirsch. sent10: something that is a bite is not a Xenicidae and not a stick. sent11: the danewort is not a stabilization. sent12: if the coney does not right gigot but it patronizes synapse then that it is not a kind of a Julian is not incorrect. sent13: the risk does not snuff booming. sent14: if something does not patronize Sacramento it is not a kind of a row and it is incommutable. sent15: if the risk does patronize synapse that the bombsight is both not non-postdiluvian and not Julian is wrong. sent16: there is something such that the fact that it snuffs booming and does right gigot is wrong. sent17: something is a kind of axonal thing that does snuff parallelism if it is not a kirsch. sent18: if there exists something such that it does snuff booming the fact that the coney patronizes synapse is true. sent19: the Islay is not nice if the danewort is not a row but incommutable. sent20: if something is not a kind of a stabilization then it does not patronize Sacramento. sent21: if there exists something such that the fact that that it does not snuff booming and does right gigot is not wrong is not right the fact that the coney does patronize synapse is not false. sent22: there exists something such that it does not snuff booming and does right gigot. sent23: something is a bite if it is not nice. sent24: the risk is axonal if the architecture is axonal. sent25: the risk is not axonal if it does snuff booming and it does right gigot.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the risk does not snuff booming but it does right gigot.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the risk is not axonal.; sent1 -> int2: the bombsight is not a kirsch if it does snuff parallelism.; sent9 -> int3: the bombsight is a postdiluvian but it is not a Julian if it is not a kind of a kirsch.;
the fact that the bombsight is a postdiluvian and is not Julian does not hold.
sent17 -> int4: if the coney is not a kirsch then it is axonal and does snuff parallelism.; sent6 -> int5: if the architecture is not a kind of a laborer then it is not a coziness and it is a fieriness.; sent10 -> int6: the Islay is not a Xenicidae and it is not a stick if it is a bite.; sent23 -> int7: if the Islay is not nice then the fact that it is a bite is not false.; sent14 -> int8: the danewort is not a row but it is not commutable if it does not patronize Sacramento.; sent20 -> int9: the danewort does not patronize Sacramento if it is not a stabilization.; int9 & sent11 -> int10: the danewort does not patronize Sacramento.; int8 & int10 -> int11: the danewort is not a row but incommutable.; sent19 & int11 -> int12: the Islay is not nice.; int7 & int12 -> int13: the Islay bites.; int6 & int13 -> int14: the Islay is not a Xenicidae and not a stick.; int14 -> int15: there is something such that it is not a Xenicidae and not a stick.; int15 & sent2 -> int16: the architecture is not a laborer.; int5 & int16 -> int17: the architecture is not a coziness but it is a kind of a fieriness.; int17 -> int18: the architecture is a fieriness.; int18 -> int19: there exists something such that it is a kind of a fieriness.;
$hypothesis$ = the bombsight is a postdiluvian and is non-Julian. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a kirsch if it snuffs parallelism. sent2: the architecture is not a kind of a laborer if something that is not a kind of a Xenicidae is not a stick. sent3: the bombsight is a kind of a postdiluvian. sent4: if the coney patronizes synapse then the bombsight does snuff parallelism. sent5: if the coney is axonal then the risk patronizes synapse. sent6: something is not a coziness and is a fieriness if it is not a laborer. sent7: something is a postdiluvian if it is not a kind of a kirsch. sent8: if the risk does not snuff booming but it rights gigot then it is not axonal. sent9: that something is a kind of a postdiluvian but it is not a Julian is correct if it is not a kirsch. sent10: something that is a bite is not a Xenicidae and not a stick. sent11: the danewort is not a stabilization. sent12: if the coney does not right gigot but it patronizes synapse then that it is not a kind of a Julian is not incorrect. sent13: the risk does not snuff booming. sent14: if something does not patronize Sacramento it is not a kind of a row and it is incommutable. sent15: if the risk does patronize synapse that the bombsight is both not non-postdiluvian and not Julian is wrong. sent16: there is something such that the fact that it snuffs booming and does right gigot is wrong. sent17: something is a kind of axonal thing that does snuff parallelism if it is not a kirsch. sent18: if there exists something such that it does snuff booming the fact that the coney patronizes synapse is true. sent19: the Islay is not nice if the danewort is not a row but incommutable. sent20: if something is not a kind of a stabilization then it does not patronize Sacramento. sent21: if there exists something such that the fact that that it does not snuff booming and does right gigot is not wrong is not right the fact that the coney does patronize synapse is not false. sent22: there exists something such that it does not snuff booming and does right gigot. sent23: something is a bite if it is not nice. sent24: the risk is axonal if the architecture is axonal. sent25: the risk is not axonal if it does snuff booming and it does right gigot. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the risk does not snuff booming but it does right gigot.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the risk is not axonal.; sent1 -> int2: the bombsight is not a kirsch if it does snuff parallelism.; sent9 -> int3: the bombsight is a postdiluvian but it is not a Julian if it is not a kind of a kirsch.; __UNKNOWN__