the West is not an impossible and it is not dichromatic.
sent1: something does not barb addressee if it is irresponsible. sent2: that the breeziness barbs addressee and it is manly is not right. sent3: the breeziness does not overpower Talpidae if that it is not cardiopulmonary and it is plumbic does not hold. sent4: the fact that the West is not a kind of an impossible and it is not dichromatic if the sauce is periodontics is right. sent5: if something is not manly but it overpowers Talpidae it does not barb addressee. sent6: if something does not barb addressee then it does overpower Talpidae. sent7: something is non-plumbic. sent8: something is non-manly thing that does overpower Talpidae if it is not a kind of a Herman. sent9: if the cisco is not philological then the fact that the sauce is not manly but it is a kind of a Herman is not right. sent10: if the cisco is not philological that the sauce is manly and is a Herman does not hold. sent11: if there is something such that it is not plumbic then the fact that the breeziness is not cardiopulmonary and is plumbic does not hold. sent12: the fact that something is philological and irresponsible is not right if it does not barb addressee. sent13: something is periodontics if that it is not manly and it is a Herman is incorrect. sent14: the cisco does overpower Talpidae. sent15: the cisco is not a Herman if there are non-periodontics things. sent16: there is something such that it is not periodontics. sent17: the breeziness is non-periodontics. sent18: that something is possible but not dichromatic is not right if it is not philological. sent19: if there exists something such that it is not plumbic then that the sauce is periodontics and is plumbic is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cisco is philological.; sent1 -> int1: if the breeziness is irresponsible then it does not barb addressee.; sent6 -> int2: the breeziness does overpower Talpidae if it does not barb addressee.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: that the breeziness is not cardiopulmonary but it is plumbic is false.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the breeziness does not overpower Talpidae.; sent13 -> int5: if that the sauce is not manly but a Herman is not correct then it is periodontics.;
the fact that the West is not an impossible and is not dichromatic is incorrect.
sent18 -> int6: if the West is not philological then the fact that the fact that it is non-impossible thing that is not dichromatic is correct is wrong.; sent12 -> int7: if the fact that the cisco does not barb addressee hold then the fact that it is a kind of philological thing that is not non-irresponsible is wrong.; sent5 -> int8: if the cisco is not manly but it overpowers Talpidae it does not barb addressee.; sent8 -> int9: if the fact that the cisco is not a Herman hold it is not manly and does overpower Talpidae.; sent16 & sent15 -> int10: the cisco is not a Herman.; int9 & int10 -> int11: the cisco is a kind of non-manly thing that overpowers Talpidae.; int8 & int11 -> int12: the cisco does not barb addressee.; int7 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the cisco is philological and it is irresponsible is not true.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that the fact that it is philological and it is irresponsible does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the West is not an impossible and it is not dichromatic. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not barb addressee if it is irresponsible. sent2: that the breeziness barbs addressee and it is manly is not right. sent3: the breeziness does not overpower Talpidae if that it is not cardiopulmonary and it is plumbic does not hold. sent4: the fact that the West is not a kind of an impossible and it is not dichromatic if the sauce is periodontics is right. sent5: if something is not manly but it overpowers Talpidae it does not barb addressee. sent6: if something does not barb addressee then it does overpower Talpidae. sent7: something is non-plumbic. sent8: something is non-manly thing that does overpower Talpidae if it is not a kind of a Herman. sent9: if the cisco is not philological then the fact that the sauce is not manly but it is a kind of a Herman is not right. sent10: if the cisco is not philological that the sauce is manly and is a Herman does not hold. sent11: if there is something such that it is not plumbic then the fact that the breeziness is not cardiopulmonary and is plumbic does not hold. sent12: the fact that something is philological and irresponsible is not right if it does not barb addressee. sent13: something is periodontics if that it is not manly and it is a Herman is incorrect. sent14: the cisco does overpower Talpidae. sent15: the cisco is not a Herman if there are non-periodontics things. sent16: there is something such that it is not periodontics. sent17: the breeziness is non-periodontics. sent18: that something is possible but not dichromatic is not right if it is not philological. sent19: if there exists something such that it is not plumbic then that the sauce is periodontics and is plumbic is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cisco is philological.; sent1 -> int1: if the breeziness is irresponsible then it does not barb addressee.; sent6 -> int2: the breeziness does overpower Talpidae if it does not barb addressee.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: that the breeziness is not cardiopulmonary but it is plumbic is false.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the breeziness does not overpower Talpidae.; sent13 -> int5: if that the sauce is not manly but a Herman is not correct then it is periodontics.; __UNKNOWN__