Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

That xanthomonad is inalterable.

{D}{c}

fact1: That circumference is unenlightened. fact2: Some person is proud if the fact that it condones directness and it is not unenlightened is wrong. fact3: The shudra is inalterable. fact4: If that circumference is not enlightened this Fauntleroy is proud. fact5: That something is not a Florentine and/or condones directness does not hold if the thing is a retrospective. fact6: Someone is not proud and/or it is not inalterable if that it is not unenlightened is true. fact7: This Fauntleroy condones directness if this fomite is a Florentine. fact8: That that xanthomonad is not non-proud is right. fact9: That circumference does not conjecture if it is not a dissimilitude. fact10: That circumference is proud. fact11: This Fauntleroy is a kind of a Florentine. fact12: If that someone is not a Florentine and/or the person condones directness does not hold then the person is not unenlightened. fact13: That xanthomonad is inalterable if that circumference is not proud. fact14: This fomite is inalterable if that xanthomonad is a Florentine. fact15: This fomite is a Florentine. fact16: This Fauntleroy does not blaspheme Picris. fact17: That xanthomonad is not inalterable if this Fauntleroy does condone directness and this thing is proud. fact18: The fact that the sealant is proud is right. fact19: This Fauntleroy is Balzacian. fact20: The straightness is unadventurous and is inalterable. fact21: This fomite does not condone directness. fact22: If that circumference is not proud then it is inalterable or it is unenlightened or both. fact23: If somebody does not conjecture then this person is a retrospective and this person wires.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {B}x fact3: {D}{fs} fact4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact5: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v {C}x) fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{D}x) fact7: {E}{d} -> {C}{b} fact8: {B}{c} fact9: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬{H}{a} fact10: {B}{a} fact11: {E}{b} fact12: (x): ¬(¬{E}x v {C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact13: ¬{B}{a} -> {D}{c} fact14: {E}{c} -> {D}{d} fact15: {E}{d} fact16: ¬{AL}{b} fact17: ({C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{D}{c} fact18: {B}{gh} fact19: {FI}{b} fact20: ({CU}{ii} & {D}{ii}) fact21: ¬{C}{d} fact22: ¬{B}{a} -> ({D}{a} v {A}{a}) fact23: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x)

That xanthomonad is inalterable.

{D}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That circumference is unenlightened. fact2: Some person is proud if the fact that it condones directness and it is not unenlightened is wrong. fact3: The shudra is inalterable. fact4: If that circumference is not enlightened this Fauntleroy is proud. fact5: That something is not a Florentine and/or condones directness does not hold if the thing is a retrospective. fact6: Someone is not proud and/or it is not inalterable if that it is not unenlightened is true. fact7: This Fauntleroy condones directness if this fomite is a Florentine. fact8: That that xanthomonad is not non-proud is right. fact9: That circumference does not conjecture if it is not a dissimilitude. fact10: That circumference is proud. fact11: This Fauntleroy is a kind of a Florentine. fact12: If that someone is not a Florentine and/or the person condones directness does not hold then the person is not unenlightened. fact13: That xanthomonad is inalterable if that circumference is not proud. fact14: This fomite is inalterable if that xanthomonad is a Florentine. fact15: This fomite is a Florentine. fact16: This Fauntleroy does not blaspheme Picris. fact17: That xanthomonad is not inalterable if this Fauntleroy does condone directness and this thing is proud. fact18: The fact that the sealant is proud is right. fact19: This Fauntleroy is Balzacian. fact20: The straightness is unadventurous and is inalterable. fact21: This fomite does not condone directness. fact22: If that circumference is not proud then it is inalterable or it is unenlightened or both. fact23: If somebody does not conjecture then this person is a retrospective and this person wires. ; $hypothesis$ = That xanthomonad is inalterable. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: This Fauntleroy is proud.; fact7 & fact15 -> int2: This Fauntleroy condones directness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This Fauntleroy condones directness and is proud.; int3 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This wastebin is not terminal.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This wastebin is terminal if something does not garble Alcidae. fact2: That the Levite garbles Alcidae and it is a Rocroi does not hold. fact3: If that shopwindow is not epizoic then the fact that this wastebin is terminal and dissertates is wrong. fact4: Some man garbles Alcidae and is a Rocroi. fact5: If the fact that somebody is not non-terminal and the person dissertates is false the person is not non-terminal. fact6: That shopwindow blobs Sibelius and is a Skylab if that unabridged does not intend. fact7: If there exists some man such that that that one garbles Alcidae and that one is a kind of a Rocroi is false then this wastebin is terminal. fact8: The fact that something is not epizoic hold if that it blobs Sibelius is not false.

fact1: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}{a} fact2: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact3: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact5: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact6: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact7: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} fact8: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x

This wastebin is not terminal.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This wastebin is terminal if something does not garble Alcidae. fact2: That the Levite garbles Alcidae and it is a Rocroi does not hold. fact3: If that shopwindow is not epizoic then the fact that this wastebin is terminal and dissertates is wrong. fact4: Some man garbles Alcidae and is a Rocroi. fact5: If the fact that somebody is not non-terminal and the person dissertates is false the person is not non-terminal. fact6: That shopwindow blobs Sibelius and is a Skylab if that unabridged does not intend. fact7: If there exists some man such that that that one garbles Alcidae and that one is a kind of a Rocroi is false then this wastebin is terminal. fact8: The fact that something is not epizoic hold if that it blobs Sibelius is not false. ; $hypothesis$ = This wastebin is not terminal. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: There is something such that that the thing garbles Alcidae and the thing is a Rocroi does not hold.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that gewgaw is not cytophotometric is right.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This trireme is insanitary. fact2: If some man that is insanitary is not a smidge it is not Hmong. fact3: The hatemonger is sanitary. fact4: That gewgaw is not cytophotometric if this trireme is not Hmong. fact5: If something that is Hmong is not seasonable the thing is cytophotometric. fact6: This trireme is not a kind of a smidge. fact7: If some man is Hmong then he/she is cytophotometric and he/she is not a Leeuwenhoek.

fact1: {AA}{aa} fact2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬{AA}{fp} fact4: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} fact5: (x): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x fact6: ¬{AB}{aa} fact7: (x): {B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{DI}x)

This community is cytophotometric and not a Leeuwenhoek.

({A}{et} & ¬{DI}{et})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This trireme is insanitary. fact2: If some man that is insanitary is not a smidge it is not Hmong. fact3: The hatemonger is sanitary. fact4: That gewgaw is not cytophotometric if this trireme is not Hmong. fact5: If something that is Hmong is not seasonable the thing is cytophotometric. fact6: This trireme is not a kind of a smidge. fact7: If some man is Hmong then he/she is cytophotometric and he/she is not a Leeuwenhoek. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that gewgaw is not cytophotometric is right. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This trireme is not Hmong if this trireme is insanitary thing that is not a smidge.; fact6 & fact1 -> int2: This trireme is insanitary thing that is not a smidge.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This trireme is not Hmong.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This chuck is not a Zairese.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That miniver is not lengthwise if that that assaulter is a Lancaster that does not imprison Lebistes does not hold. fact2: If this chuck is a fleet then this chuck is a Cypraeidae. fact3: That that assaulter is a kind of a Lancaster but that does not imprison Lebistes is incorrect. fact4: This employee is not a Zairese but it is naval if that that fashionmonger is not a glibness hold. fact5: Some man is a Cypraeidae but this one is not a fleet if this one is not a kind of a Sufi. fact6: That fashionmonger is polydactylous if that miniver is a kind of a Springfield. fact7: If some man is a Cypraeidae it is a Zairese. fact8: This chuck is a fleet. fact9: This chuck is not a Zairese if this employee is not a kind of a Zairese and is a kind of a Cypraeidae. fact10: If that miniver is polydactylous then that fashionmonger is not polydactylous. fact11: If something is not lengthwise then it is polydactylous and/or it is a Springfield. fact12: If the fact that something is polydactylous is not false then it is not a kind of a glibness.

fact1: ¬({L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact3: ¬({L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) fact4: ¬{E}{c} -> (¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact5: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact6: {J}{d} -> {F}{c} fact7: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact8: {A}{a} fact9: (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact10: {F}{d} -> {F}{c} fact11: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x v {J}x) fact12: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}x

This chuck is not a Zairese.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That miniver is not lengthwise if that that assaulter is a Lancaster that does not imprison Lebistes does not hold. fact2: If this chuck is a fleet then this chuck is a Cypraeidae. fact3: That that assaulter is a kind of a Lancaster but that does not imprison Lebistes is incorrect. fact4: This employee is not a Zairese but it is naval if that that fashionmonger is not a glibness hold. fact5: Some man is a Cypraeidae but this one is not a fleet if this one is not a kind of a Sufi. fact6: That fashionmonger is polydactylous if that miniver is a kind of a Springfield. fact7: If some man is a Cypraeidae it is a Zairese. fact8: This chuck is a fleet. fact9: This chuck is not a Zairese if this employee is not a kind of a Zairese and is a kind of a Cypraeidae. fact10: If that miniver is polydactylous then that fashionmonger is not polydactylous. fact11: If something is not lengthwise then it is polydactylous and/or it is a Springfield. fact12: If the fact that something is polydactylous is not false then it is not a kind of a glibness. ; $hypothesis$ = This chuck is not a Zairese. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact8 -> int1: The fact that this chuck is a Cypraeidae is true.; fact7 -> int2: This chuck is a Zairese if this chuck is a Cypraeidae.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This probationer either is a kind of a limpness or is not perithelial or both.

({D}{b} v ¬{C}{b})

fact1: This germanium disobeys Anu if she/he is a cool. fact2: Some person is not adventuristic if that it displumes Hymenogastrales and is adventuristic is wrong. fact3: If that cervid is not haematal the fact that this dish displumes Hymenogastrales and is adventuristic does not hold. fact4: The fact that something disobeys Anu and is not a cool is wrong if it is not adventuristic. fact5: If this germanium is not a cool then this probationer is not a cool. fact6: That cervid is not haematal if that that tickseed is both scrupulous and not katabolic is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that this Yank is a kind of a Hepaticopsida and the thing is a Harefoot is not true this seedbed does not ankylose. fact8: This probationer is a kind of a limpness or it is not perithelial or both if that this germanium disobeys Anu is correct. fact9: The fact that this Yank is a kind of a Hepaticopsida and is a Harefoot does not hold if this Yank is not a peevishness. fact10: That tickseed is a kind of a enteroptosis if this seedbed is a Aruba. fact11: If something is not a kind of a cool then the fact that that thing is either a limpness or not perithelial or both does not hold. fact12: If this seedbed does not ankylose then this seedbed embrowns and it is a Aruba. fact13: This germanium is a cool. fact14: If something is a enteroptosis then that the thing is not unscrupulous and the thing is not katabolic is false. fact15: If the fact that this dish disobeys Anu but it is not a cool is incorrect this germanium is not a cool.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬({G}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x fact3: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({G}{c} & {E}{c}) fact4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact6: ¬(¬{H}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} fact7: ¬({O}{g} & {N}{g}) -> ¬{M}{f} fact8: {B}{a} -> ({D}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) fact9: ¬{P}{g} -> ¬({O}{g} & {N}{g}) fact10: {K}{f} -> {J}{e} fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x v ¬{C}x) fact12: ¬{M}{f} -> ({L}{f} & {K}{f}) fact13: {A}{a} fact14: (x): {J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) fact15: ¬({B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a}

The fact that this probationer is either a limpness or not perithelial or both is wrong.

¬({D}{b} v ¬{C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This germanium disobeys Anu if she/he is a cool. fact2: Some person is not adventuristic if that it displumes Hymenogastrales and is adventuristic is wrong. fact3: If that cervid is not haematal the fact that this dish displumes Hymenogastrales and is adventuristic does not hold. fact4: The fact that something disobeys Anu and is not a cool is wrong if it is not adventuristic. fact5: If this germanium is not a cool then this probationer is not a cool. fact6: That cervid is not haematal if that that tickseed is both scrupulous and not katabolic is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that this Yank is a kind of a Hepaticopsida and the thing is a Harefoot is not true this seedbed does not ankylose. fact8: This probationer is a kind of a limpness or it is not perithelial or both if that this germanium disobeys Anu is correct. fact9: The fact that this Yank is a kind of a Hepaticopsida and is a Harefoot does not hold if this Yank is not a peevishness. fact10: That tickseed is a kind of a enteroptosis if this seedbed is a Aruba. fact11: If something is not a kind of a cool then the fact that that thing is either a limpness or not perithelial or both does not hold. fact12: If this seedbed does not ankylose then this seedbed embrowns and it is a Aruba. fact13: This germanium is a cool. fact14: If something is a enteroptosis then that the thing is not unscrupulous and the thing is not katabolic is false. fact15: If the fact that this dish disobeys Anu but it is not a cool is incorrect this germanium is not a cool. ; $hypothesis$ = This probationer either is a kind of a limpness or is not perithelial or both. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact13 -> int1: This germanium disobeys Anu.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Either this moralist suspires placard or that one is conditional or both.

({C}{a} v {B}{a})

fact1: That something suspires placard or is conditional or both is incorrect if this thing is not allomerous. fact2: This moralist is allomerous.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x v {B}x) fact2: {A}{a}

That the fact that this moralist suspires placard and/or it is not non-conditional is correct is not right.

¬({C}{a} v {B}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That something suspires placard or is conditional or both is incorrect if this thing is not allomerous. fact2: This moralist is allomerous. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this moralist suspires placard or that one is conditional or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everything is chyliferous does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything is a kind of a Shepard. fact2: Everything colours. fact3: The fact that everything is a Toynbee is right. fact4: If that something does not unfasten and is a predicate is wrong then this is not a kind of a predicate. fact5: The fact that every person is alkylic is true. fact6: Everything is chyliferous. fact7: Everything is unconformist. fact8: Everything thieves. fact9: Everything acts. fact10: Somebody is chyliferous but it is not a kind of a Haematobia if it is not a kind of a Maui. fact11: Everything tends Melba. fact12: Everyone annihilates. fact13: If somebody is not a predicate then the person is not a Maui. fact14: If a chyliferous thing is not a Haematobia then this chairs Thessaloniki. fact15: Everything is a homonym. fact16: That everything is a Piciformes is correct.

fact1: (x): {HC}x fact2: (x): {GO}x fact3: (x): {IM}x fact4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x fact5: (x): {GM}x fact6: (x): {A}x fact7: (x): {ET}x fact8: (x): {BR}x fact9: (x): {CQ}x fact10: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact11: (x): {EF}x fact12: (x): {HO}x fact13: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x fact14: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {EK}x fact15: (x): {P}x fact16: (x): {IA}x

Everything chairs Thessaloniki.

(x): {EK}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a kind of a Shepard. fact2: Everything colours. fact3: The fact that everything is a Toynbee is right. fact4: If that something does not unfasten and is a predicate is wrong then this is not a kind of a predicate. fact5: The fact that every person is alkylic is true. fact6: Everything is chyliferous. fact7: Everything is unconformist. fact8: Everything thieves. fact9: Everything acts. fact10: Somebody is chyliferous but it is not a kind of a Haematobia if it is not a kind of a Maui. fact11: Everything tends Melba. fact12: Everyone annihilates. fact13: If somebody is not a predicate then the person is not a Maui. fact14: If a chyliferous thing is not a Haematobia then this chairs Thessaloniki. fact15: Everything is a homonym. fact16: That everything is a Piciformes is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is chyliferous does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That elastance is half.

{D}{b}

fact1: If that rings is not a kind of a schtikl that elastance is not a kind of a schtikl. fact2: That rings is not a schtikl if this cymbidium is Levantine. fact3: Everything does not Park starred. fact4: Something is half if it is a naif. fact5: That elastance is a naif if that hematochrome is nonruminant. fact6: The fact that this draftee is a biosafety but the one is not nonruminant does not hold if this draftee is not a woodpile. fact7: If the fact that someone is a biosafety and is not nonruminant is not right it is nonruminant. fact8: Something that does not Park starred either is a schtikl or is Levantine or both. fact9: If that elastance is not a schtikl and/or this one is half this squabbler is a schtikl. fact10: That hematochrome is a kind of a jetting that is not ruminant. fact11: This draftee is not a woodpile if that that person is a woodpile and is not latitudinal does not hold. fact12: If this cymbidium is a schtikl that rings is not a schtikl. fact13: The fact that this draftee is a woodpile and is not latitudinal does not hold.

fact1: ¬{AK}{c} -> ¬{AK}{b} fact2: {E}{d} -> ¬{AK}{c} fact3: (x): ¬{F}x fact4: (x): {C}x -> {D}x fact5: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact6: ¬{H}{e} -> ¬({G}{e} & ¬{B}{e}) fact7: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x fact8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({AK}x v {E}x) fact9: (¬{AK}{b} v {D}{b}) -> {AK}{ff} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: ¬({H}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{H}{e} fact12: {AK}{d} -> ¬{AK}{c} fact13: ¬({H}{e} & ¬{I}{e})

This squabbler is a kind of a schtikl that is a naif.

({AK}{ff} & {C}{ff})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that rings is not a kind of a schtikl that elastance is not a kind of a schtikl. fact2: That rings is not a schtikl if this cymbidium is Levantine. fact3: Everything does not Park starred. fact4: Something is half if it is a naif. fact5: That elastance is a naif if that hematochrome is nonruminant. fact6: The fact that this draftee is a biosafety but the one is not nonruminant does not hold if this draftee is not a woodpile. fact7: If the fact that someone is a biosafety and is not nonruminant is not right it is nonruminant. fact8: Something that does not Park starred either is a schtikl or is Levantine or both. fact9: If that elastance is not a schtikl and/or this one is half this squabbler is a schtikl. fact10: That hematochrome is a kind of a jetting that is not ruminant. fact11: This draftee is not a woodpile if that that person is a woodpile and is not latitudinal does not hold. fact12: If this cymbidium is a schtikl that rings is not a schtikl. fact13: The fact that this draftee is a woodpile and is not latitudinal does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That elastance is half. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That hematochrome is nonruminant.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: That elastance is a kind of a naif.; fact4 -> int3: If that elastance is a kind of a naif that elastance is half.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that phalanx is a hydrography and it is a Rhodymeniaceae is incorrect.

¬({C}{a} & {D}{a})

fact1: The fact that that phalanx is antibiotic is right. fact2: If the fact that that scoutmaster is a kind of a plantigrade but the thing is not a eosinophilia is wrong that scoutmaster is not a Gwyn. fact3: That phalanx is a Rhodymeniaceae if this hornstone is a Rhodymeniaceae but this one is not a last. fact4: This cider is not multiparous. fact5: That scoutmaster is not multiparous. fact6: Something is prenominal and it is a NRO if the fact that it does not bib is true. fact7: If some man is multiparous but he is not a stacked then he is not antibiotic. fact8: If this cider is not multiparous then that it is not a hydrography is right. fact9: Something does not bib if that this thing is a kind of a jejunity and this thing is catechetical is incorrect. fact10: The fact that this hornstone is a Rhodymeniaceae hold if that scoutmaster is not multiparous. fact11: Something is multiparous thing that is not a stacked if it is not a last. fact12: That that scoutmaster is a kind of a plantigrade but it is not a eosinophilia does not hold if that scoutmaster is not a kind of an ideal. fact13: This hornstone is a Rhodymeniaceae. fact14: The fact that this cocklebur is antibiotic and it is unseeded is true. fact15: The fact that that scoutmaster is a kind of a jejunity and it is catechetical is incorrect if that scoutmaster is not a Gwyn. fact16: This hornstone is not a hydrography. fact17: That something is a hydrography and it is a Rhodymeniaceae is incorrect if it is not antibiotic. fact18: That phalanx is a kind of antibiotic one that is a stacked. fact19: That phalanx is proteolytic if that phalanx is a Rhodymeniaceae. fact20: If that something is a stacked is right then the fact that it is a kind of a hydrography hold. fact21: That scoutmaster is a hydrography. fact22: That this hornstone is not a dazzle and is not a last does not hold if that scoutmaster is prenominal. fact23: The emcee consolidates and this is a Rhodymeniaceae.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: ¬({O}{c} & ¬{N}{c}) -> ¬{M}{c} fact3: ({D}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> {D}{a} fact4: ¬{E}{eb} fact5: ¬{E}{c} fact6: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({H}x & {I}x) fact7: (x): ({E}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact8: ¬{E}{eb} -> ¬{C}{eb} fact9: (x): ¬({K}x & {L}x) -> ¬{J}x fact10: ¬{E}{c} -> {D}{b} fact11: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & ¬{B}x) fact12: ¬{P}{c} -> ¬({O}{c} & ¬{N}{c}) fact13: {D}{b} fact14: ({A}{dc} & {DE}{dc}) fact15: ¬{M}{c} -> ¬({K}{c} & {L}{c}) fact16: ¬{C}{b} fact17: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {D}x) fact18: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact19: {D}{a} -> {GJ}{a} fact20: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact21: {C}{c} fact22: {H}{c} -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) fact23: ({HS}{cm} & {D}{cm})

That that phalanx is a hydrography and it is a Rhodymeniaceae is incorrect.

¬({C}{a} & {D}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that phalanx is antibiotic is right. fact2: If the fact that that scoutmaster is a kind of a plantigrade but the thing is not a eosinophilia is wrong that scoutmaster is not a Gwyn. fact3: That phalanx is a Rhodymeniaceae if this hornstone is a Rhodymeniaceae but this one is not a last. fact4: This cider is not multiparous. fact5: That scoutmaster is not multiparous. fact6: Something is prenominal and it is a NRO if the fact that it does not bib is true. fact7: If some man is multiparous but he is not a stacked then he is not antibiotic. fact8: If this cider is not multiparous then that it is not a hydrography is right. fact9: Something does not bib if that this thing is a kind of a jejunity and this thing is catechetical is incorrect. fact10: The fact that this hornstone is a Rhodymeniaceae hold if that scoutmaster is not multiparous. fact11: Something is multiparous thing that is not a stacked if it is not a last. fact12: That that scoutmaster is a kind of a plantigrade but it is not a eosinophilia does not hold if that scoutmaster is not a kind of an ideal. fact13: This hornstone is a Rhodymeniaceae. fact14: The fact that this cocklebur is antibiotic and it is unseeded is true. fact15: The fact that that scoutmaster is a kind of a jejunity and it is catechetical is incorrect if that scoutmaster is not a Gwyn. fact16: This hornstone is not a hydrography. fact17: That something is a hydrography and it is a Rhodymeniaceae is incorrect if it is not antibiotic. fact18: That phalanx is a kind of antibiotic one that is a stacked. fact19: That phalanx is proteolytic if that phalanx is a Rhodymeniaceae. fact20: If that something is a stacked is right then the fact that it is a kind of a hydrography hold. fact21: That scoutmaster is a hydrography. fact22: That this hornstone is not a dazzle and is not a last does not hold if that scoutmaster is prenominal. fact23: The emcee consolidates and this is a Rhodymeniaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = That that phalanx is a hydrography and it is a Rhodymeniaceae is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this boner does not occurs but that oinking taboo happens does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: The fact that both that generalcy and that unemployableness occurs is incorrect. fact2: That that generalcy does not happens but that fossilizing occurs does not hold. fact3: The fact that this boner does not occurs but that oinking taboo happens does not hold.

fact1: ¬({IU} & {FD}) fact2: ¬(¬{IU} & {CG}) fact3: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that both that generalcy and that unemployableness occurs is incorrect. fact2: That that generalcy does not happens but that fossilizing occurs does not hold. fact3: The fact that this boner does not occurs but that oinking taboo happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this boner does not occurs but that oinking taboo happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That gittern is not a Hebrew.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: The fact that this workplace is oligarchical and the thing is guiltless is right. fact2: This workplace is oligarchical. fact3: If the fact that someone coincides and is not a kind of a Spinoza does not hold it does not coincides. fact4: If that axil is a Spinoza that that axil is a kind of a Caryocaraceae hold. fact5: That somebody coincides and is not a Spinoza does not hold if it birlings hemochromatosis. fact6: That if that axil is a Caryocaraceae then this workplace is a Caryocaraceae hold. fact7: If some man is not hirsute then the fact that it does not birling hemochromatosis and is achondritic is false. fact8: If this foot is not a Tetragonurus then that axil is a Caryocaraceae and/or is a kind of a humorousness. fact9: The fact that that that axil is not a kind of a Spinoza but it is not non-hirsute is true is wrong if it is achondritic. fact10: If a oligarchical thing is not guilty it is not a Hebrew. fact11: The fact that this Rimactane is a kind of a humorousness is true. fact12: This Rimactane birlings hemochromatosis if the fact that it does not birlings hemochromatosis and is achondritic is wrong. fact13: If this foot does not coincide that gittern is both oligarchical and a Tetragonurus. fact14: If that axil is not a humorousness and is a Caryocaraceae this workplace is a Caryocaraceae. fact15: That gittern is guiltless if this workplace is a kind of a Caryocaraceae. fact16: This Rimactane is non-hirsute and it does not ptyalise Lorca. fact17: If this Rimactane is a humorousness that axil is not a humorousness. fact18: This foot is not a Tetragonurus if this Rimactane does not coincide. fact19: That gittern is guiltless. fact20: The fact that Thelma is a Hebrew is true. fact21: If the fact that that axil is not a kind of a Spinoza and is hirsute is false then that axil is a Spinoza. fact22: If this workplace is guiltless that gittern is a Hebrew.

fact1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: {A}{a} fact3: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{G}x fact4: {H}{c} -> {D}{c} fact5: (x): {I}x -> ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) fact6: {D}{c} -> {D}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & {K}x) fact8: ¬{F}{d} -> ({D}{c} v {E}{c}) fact9: {K}{c} -> ¬(¬{H}{c} & {J}{c}) fact10: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact11: {E}{e} fact12: ¬(¬{I}{e} & {K}{e}) -> {I}{e} fact13: ¬{G}{d} -> ({A}{b} & {F}{b}) fact14: (¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) -> {D}{a} fact15: {D}{a} -> {B}{b} fact16: (¬{J}{e} & ¬{L}{e}) fact17: {E}{e} -> ¬{E}{c} fact18: ¬{G}{e} -> ¬{F}{d} fact19: {B}{b} fact20: {C}{bu} fact21: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {J}{c}) -> {H}{c} fact22: {B}{a} -> {C}{b}

That gittern is not a Hebrew.

¬{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this workplace is oligarchical and the thing is guiltless is right. fact2: This workplace is oligarchical. fact3: If the fact that someone coincides and is not a kind of a Spinoza does not hold it does not coincides. fact4: If that axil is a Spinoza that that axil is a kind of a Caryocaraceae hold. fact5: That somebody coincides and is not a Spinoza does not hold if it birlings hemochromatosis. fact6: That if that axil is a Caryocaraceae then this workplace is a Caryocaraceae hold. fact7: If some man is not hirsute then the fact that it does not birling hemochromatosis and is achondritic is false. fact8: If this foot is not a Tetragonurus then that axil is a Caryocaraceae and/or is a kind of a humorousness. fact9: The fact that that that axil is not a kind of a Spinoza but it is not non-hirsute is true is wrong if it is achondritic. fact10: If a oligarchical thing is not guilty it is not a Hebrew. fact11: The fact that this Rimactane is a kind of a humorousness is true. fact12: This Rimactane birlings hemochromatosis if the fact that it does not birlings hemochromatosis and is achondritic is wrong. fact13: If this foot does not coincide that gittern is both oligarchical and a Tetragonurus. fact14: If that axil is not a humorousness and is a Caryocaraceae this workplace is a Caryocaraceae. fact15: That gittern is guiltless if this workplace is a kind of a Caryocaraceae. fact16: This Rimactane is non-hirsute and it does not ptyalise Lorca. fact17: If this Rimactane is a humorousness that axil is not a humorousness. fact18: This foot is not a Tetragonurus if this Rimactane does not coincide. fact19: That gittern is guiltless. fact20: The fact that Thelma is a Hebrew is true. fact21: If the fact that that axil is not a kind of a Spinoza and is hirsute is false then that axil is a Spinoza. fact22: If this workplace is guiltless that gittern is a Hebrew. ; $hypothesis$ = That gittern is not a Hebrew. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: The fact that this workplace is guiltless hold.; int1 & fact22 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That herrerasaurus is a kind of an independent.

{D}{b}

fact1: That that herrerasaurus is cannibalistic and this thing is animated is not correct. fact2: If that the fact that that herrerasaurus is not cannibalistic but animated is not right is correct then that herrerasaurus is an independent. fact3: That that sudorific does not netmail disgustingness and it is not a Manis is incorrect. fact4: If that that sudorific does not netmail disgustingness and is not a Manis does not hold that herrerasaurus does not entwine kina. fact5: If that sudorific is animated but it is not a Manis then this MAO is not a Manis. fact6: If that herrerasaurus does not entwine kina then the fact that this thing is not cannibalistic and this thing is animated is wrong.

fact1: ¬({C}{b} & {A}{b}) fact2: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {D}{b} fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: ({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{ga} fact6: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b})

This MAO is not a Manis.

¬{AB}{ga}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that herrerasaurus is cannibalistic and this thing is animated is not correct. fact2: If that the fact that that herrerasaurus is not cannibalistic but animated is not right is correct then that herrerasaurus is an independent. fact3: That that sudorific does not netmail disgustingness and it is not a Manis is incorrect. fact4: If that that sudorific does not netmail disgustingness and is not a Manis does not hold that herrerasaurus does not entwine kina. fact5: If that sudorific is animated but it is not a Manis then this MAO is not a Manis. fact6: If that herrerasaurus does not entwine kina then the fact that this thing is not cannibalistic and this thing is animated is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That herrerasaurus is a kind of an independent. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 -> int1: That herrerasaurus does not entwine kina.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: That that herrerasaurus is not cannibalistic but it is animated does not hold.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Moresqueness does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: If this chopping does not happens then this Moresqueness happens or that aversion occurs or both. fact2: The Christianization occurs. fact3: This retention occurs. fact4: That sepulchralness occurs. fact5: This Moresqueness and that aversion occurs. fact6: If this chopping does not occurs then notthis Moresqueness but that aversion occurs. fact7: If that crosswind occurs notthis chopping but this rotatoriness happens. fact8: This chopping does not happens if this rotatoriness does not occurs. fact9: That aversion happens.

fact1: ¬{C} -> ({A} v {B}) fact2: {AE} fact3: {R} fact4: {M} fact5: ({A} & {B}) fact6: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact7: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact8: ¬{D} -> ¬{C} fact9: {B}

This Moresqueness does not occurs.

¬{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this chopping does not happens then this Moresqueness happens or that aversion occurs or both. fact2: The Christianization occurs. fact3: This retention occurs. fact4: That sepulchralness occurs. fact5: This Moresqueness and that aversion occurs. fact6: If this chopping does not occurs then notthis Moresqueness but that aversion occurs. fact7: If that crosswind occurs notthis chopping but this rotatoriness happens. fact8: This chopping does not happens if this rotatoriness does not occurs. fact9: That aversion happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This Moresqueness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That motorcoach is not digital.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If that paramecium is a Freyja that motorcoach is digital. fact2: That paramecium does not disentangle Gris. fact3: Some person that disentangles Gris and is a Freyja is not digital. fact4: If that paramecium does not disentangle Gris then that paramecium is both untypical and not granulomatous. fact5: The spermophile is not granulomatous. fact6: If that motorcoach is a kind of a find then that motorcoach disentangles Gris. fact7: That paramecium is untypical. fact8: That motorcoach is a find. fact9: that Gris does not disentangle paramecium. fact10: That paramecium is a Freyja if that thing is untypical and that thing is not granulomatous.

fact1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: ¬{AB}{bm} fact6: {F}{b} -> {A}{b} fact7: {AA}{a} fact8: {F}{b} fact9: ¬{AC}{aa} fact10: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a}

That motorcoach is not digital.

¬{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that paramecium is a Freyja that motorcoach is digital. fact2: That paramecium does not disentangle Gris. fact3: Some person that disentangles Gris and is a Freyja is not digital. fact4: If that paramecium does not disentangle Gris then that paramecium is both untypical and not granulomatous. fact5: The spermophile is not granulomatous. fact6: If that motorcoach is a kind of a find then that motorcoach disentangles Gris. fact7: That paramecium is untypical. fact8: That motorcoach is a find. fact9: that Gris does not disentangle paramecium. fact10: That paramecium is a Freyja if that thing is untypical and that thing is not granulomatous. ; $hypothesis$ = That motorcoach is not digital. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> int1: That paramecium is untypical but it is not granulomatous.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That paramecium is a Freyja.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That spinnaker is a admirableness.

{B}{c}

fact1: That spinnaker is not palmar. fact2: This Darwinian is not a kind of a social. fact3: The fact that this flaxseed is a kind of a Mormon and is a social is false. fact4: This flaxseed is not a admirableness. fact5: If this Darwinian is not palmar this flaxseed is not a social. fact6: The fact that this coprolite is not a kind of a social is not wrong. fact7: This assayer is not a admirableness. fact8: If this Darwinian is not a kind of a admirableness the fact that that that spinnaker is both a Mormon and a social is incorrect is true. fact9: This Darwinian does not rollicking. fact10: That the fact that the fact that this flaxseed is a admirableness and that is a social is true is incorrect if that spinnaker is not palmar hold. fact11: This flaxseed is not a kind of a social. fact12: If that this Darwinian is not a kind of a Mormon is correct then this flaxseed is not a social. fact13: That spinnaker is not a kind of a admirableness if that this flaxseed is palmar and this one is a Mormon does not hold. fact14: That this flaxseed is a admirableness and it is palmar is wrong. fact15: That this flaxseed is palmar and that thing is a Mormon is incorrect if this Darwinian is not a social. fact16: That the cad is palmar and this one is a Sphaerocarpaceae does not hold. fact17: That this flaxseed is palmar and is a kind of a admirableness is incorrect if that spinnaker is not a Mormon. fact18: That this flaxseed is a kind of a admirableness and that person is a social does not hold if this Darwinian is not a Mormon.

fact1: ¬{AA}{c} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact4: ¬{B}{b} fact5: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact6: ¬{A}{bh} fact7: ¬{B}{im} fact8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({AB}{c} & {A}{c}) fact9: ¬{HN}{a} fact10: ¬{AA}{c} -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact11: ¬{A}{b} fact12: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact13: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} fact14: ¬({B}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact16: ¬({AA}{l} & {HA}{l}) fact17: ¬{AB}{c} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) fact18: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That spinnaker is not palmar. fact2: This Darwinian is not a kind of a social. fact3: The fact that this flaxseed is a kind of a Mormon and is a social is false. fact4: This flaxseed is not a admirableness. fact5: If this Darwinian is not palmar this flaxseed is not a social. fact6: The fact that this coprolite is not a kind of a social is not wrong. fact7: This assayer is not a admirableness. fact8: If this Darwinian is not a kind of a admirableness the fact that that that spinnaker is both a Mormon and a social is incorrect is true. fact9: This Darwinian does not rollicking. fact10: That the fact that the fact that this flaxseed is a admirableness and that is a social is true is incorrect if that spinnaker is not palmar hold. fact11: This flaxseed is not a kind of a social. fact12: If that this Darwinian is not a kind of a Mormon is correct then this flaxseed is not a social. fact13: That spinnaker is not a kind of a admirableness if that this flaxseed is palmar and this one is a Mormon does not hold. fact14: That this flaxseed is a admirableness and it is palmar is wrong. fact15: That this flaxseed is palmar and that thing is a Mormon is incorrect if this Darwinian is not a social. fact16: That the cad is palmar and this one is a Sphaerocarpaceae does not hold. fact17: That this flaxseed is palmar and is a kind of a admirableness is incorrect if that spinnaker is not a Mormon. fact18: That this flaxseed is a kind of a admirableness and that person is a social does not hold if this Darwinian is not a Mormon. ; $hypothesis$ = That spinnaker is a admirableness. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact2 -> int1: The fact that this flaxseed is palmar and he is a kind of a Mormon does not hold.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That canafistola is non-apetalous.

¬{D}{a}

fact1: This saliva is not a kind of a Dixiecrats but it is apetalous if it is not a realness. fact2: That that mouse is not a mini if that mouse is a kind of nonexploratory thing that does not truss eudaemon is true. fact3: That canafistola is a perspective or it is not a physiology or both if that Howard is not apetalous does not hold. fact4: If that canafistola is a physiology then that canafistola is a Madagascan. fact5: That canafistola is a Plectomycetes if it is a perspective. fact6: Something is not apetalous if it is a Plectomycetes and it is a kind of a physiology. fact7: This sago is a realness that blows ecphonesis. fact8: The cure is a Plectomycetes that rusts veined. fact9: That canafistola is a realness. fact10: The fact that Howard is a physiology and/or it is a realness does not hold if this saliva is not a Dixiecrats. fact11: That canafistola is a perspective. fact12: This saliva is not a Dixiecrats if this symposiarch is not a kind of a Dixiecrats and agitates stopped. fact13: That canafistola is a physiology if he is a realness. fact14: That canafistola is not a kind of a Plectomycetes if the fact that Howard is a kind of a physiology and/or is a realness is false. fact15: If something that unclothes Mytilene is a fries then that this is not musicological hold. fact16: If that mouse is not a kind of a mini that this symposiarch Bellows Babar and is probabilistic is wrong. fact17: If this saliva is not a Dixiecrats but apetalous Howard is apetalous. fact18: That that canafistola does agitate stopped is not wrong. fact19: If something does not Bellow Babar then this thing is not a Dixiecrats and does agitate stopped. fact20: If that canafistola is a perspective or he/she is not a physiology or both that blinks is a perspective. fact21: The hipline is a Plectomycetes. fact22: That canafistola aerates enigma and is a sociable. fact23: If that something Bellows Babar and this is probabilistic is incorrect this does not Bellows Babar.

fact1: ¬{E}{c} -> (¬{F}{c} & {D}{c}) fact2: (¬{K}{e} & ¬{L}{e}) -> ¬{J}{e} fact3: {D}{b} -> ({A}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) fact4: {C}{a} -> {EJ}{a} fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact6: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact7: ({E}{ae} & {FE}{ae}) fact8: ({B}{du} & {DF}{du}) fact9: {E}{a} fact10: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({C}{b} v {E}{b}) fact11: {A}{a} fact12: (¬{F}{d} & {G}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} fact13: {E}{a} -> {C}{a} fact14: ¬({C}{b} v {E}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact15: (x): ({AP}x & {EI}x) -> ¬{ET}x fact16: ¬{J}{e} -> ¬({H}{d} & {I}{d}) fact17: (¬{F}{c} & {D}{c}) -> {D}{b} fact18: {G}{a} fact19: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & {G}x) fact20: ({A}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{fq} fact21: {B}{gq} fact22: ({IC}{a} & {DQ}{a}) fact23: (x): ¬({H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{H}x

That blinks is a Plectomycetes.

{B}{fq}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This saliva is not a kind of a Dixiecrats but it is apetalous if it is not a realness. fact2: That that mouse is not a mini if that mouse is a kind of nonexploratory thing that does not truss eudaemon is true. fact3: That canafistola is a perspective or it is not a physiology or both if that Howard is not apetalous does not hold. fact4: If that canafistola is a physiology then that canafistola is a Madagascan. fact5: That canafistola is a Plectomycetes if it is a perspective. fact6: Something is not apetalous if it is a Plectomycetes and it is a kind of a physiology. fact7: This sago is a realness that blows ecphonesis. fact8: The cure is a Plectomycetes that rusts veined. fact9: That canafistola is a realness. fact10: The fact that Howard is a physiology and/or it is a realness does not hold if this saliva is not a Dixiecrats. fact11: That canafistola is a perspective. fact12: This saliva is not a Dixiecrats if this symposiarch is not a kind of a Dixiecrats and agitates stopped. fact13: That canafistola is a physiology if he is a realness. fact14: That canafistola is not a kind of a Plectomycetes if the fact that Howard is a kind of a physiology and/or is a realness is false. fact15: If something that unclothes Mytilene is a fries then that this is not musicological hold. fact16: If that mouse is not a kind of a mini that this symposiarch Bellows Babar and is probabilistic is wrong. fact17: If this saliva is not a Dixiecrats but apetalous Howard is apetalous. fact18: That that canafistola does agitate stopped is not wrong. fact19: If something does not Bellow Babar then this thing is not a Dixiecrats and does agitate stopped. fact20: If that canafistola is a perspective or he/she is not a physiology or both that blinks is a perspective. fact21: The hipline is a Plectomycetes. fact22: That canafistola aerates enigma and is a sociable. fact23: If that something Bellows Babar and this is probabilistic is incorrect this does not Bellows Babar. ; $hypothesis$ = That canafistola is non-apetalous. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact11 -> int1: That that canafistola is a Plectomycetes hold.; fact13 & fact9 -> int2: That canafistola is a physiology.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That canafistola is a Plectomycetes and a physiology.; fact6 -> int4: If that canafistola is a Plectomycetes and it is a physiology it is not apetalous.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this cirripede is not a kind of a angiology and does not trouble affix is incorrect.

¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{E}{c})

fact1: If that percoid does not trouble affix then this does not trouble affix and this is not a honeycombed. fact2: That something is not a angiology and it does not trouble affix is incorrect if it is not a honeycombed. fact3: If that percoid is clonic and/or is not an implant then he does not debate Aleppo. fact4: This cirripede is not a kind of a angiology if that percoid does not consult redefinition. fact5: Something is not a angiology and does not trouble affix if that is not a angiology. fact6: If that percoid does not consult redefinition then this cirripede is a angiology. fact7: If somebody is not an epoch then the one is not a kind of an epoch and does not case puce. fact8: This cirripede is not a honeycombed if that that percoid does not consult redefinition and/or does not slash is false. fact9: If this cirripede consults redefinition the fact that that percoid does not trouble affix is not incorrect. fact10: If that something does not combine thrombopenia and the thing is not a contrasting is correct the thing is not a muscle. fact11: If that percoid is not anthropical then that percoid is not anthropical and is not a bulimic. fact12: If that percoid does not trouble affix this cirripede does not consult redefinition. fact13: That percoid is not an undertone. fact14: If somebody does not debate Aleppo then that person does not combine thrombopenia and that person is not a contrasting. fact15: That percoid either is a kind of a honeycombed or does not consult redefinition or both. fact16: If that percoid is a kind of a honeycombed then this cirripede is not a angiology. fact17: That percoid is not a angiology if this cirripede consults redefinition. fact18: That percoid troubles affix and/or it does not consult redefinition. fact19: If someone is not a muscle then that she does not consult redefinition or does not slash or both is wrong. fact20: The binding is not a kind of a honeycombed.

fact1: ¬{E}{a} -> (¬{E}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) fact3: ({J}{a} v ¬{K}{a}) -> ¬{I}{a} fact4: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{c} fact5: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) fact6: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact7: (x): ¬{AR}x -> (¬{AR}x & ¬{IH}x) fact8: ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact9: {B}{c} -> ¬{E}{a} fact10: (x): (¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x fact11: ¬{FT}{a} -> (¬{FT}{a} & ¬{AT}{a}) fact12: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬{B}{c} fact13: ¬{BK}{a} fact14: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) fact15: ({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact16: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{c} fact17: {B}{c} -> ¬{C}{a} fact18: ({E}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact19: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{D}x) fact20: ¬{A}{fn}

That this cirripede is not a kind of a angiology and does not trouble affix is incorrect.

¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{E}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that percoid does not trouble affix then this does not trouble affix and this is not a honeycombed. fact2: That something is not a angiology and it does not trouble affix is incorrect if it is not a honeycombed. fact3: If that percoid is clonic and/or is not an implant then he does not debate Aleppo. fact4: This cirripede is not a kind of a angiology if that percoid does not consult redefinition. fact5: Something is not a angiology and does not trouble affix if that is not a angiology. fact6: If that percoid does not consult redefinition then this cirripede is a angiology. fact7: If somebody is not an epoch then the one is not a kind of an epoch and does not case puce. fact8: This cirripede is not a honeycombed if that that percoid does not consult redefinition and/or does not slash is false. fact9: If this cirripede consults redefinition the fact that that percoid does not trouble affix is not incorrect. fact10: If that something does not combine thrombopenia and the thing is not a contrasting is correct the thing is not a muscle. fact11: If that percoid is not anthropical then that percoid is not anthropical and is not a bulimic. fact12: If that percoid does not trouble affix this cirripede does not consult redefinition. fact13: That percoid is not an undertone. fact14: If somebody does not debate Aleppo then that person does not combine thrombopenia and that person is not a contrasting. fact15: That percoid either is a kind of a honeycombed or does not consult redefinition or both. fact16: If that percoid is a kind of a honeycombed then this cirripede is not a angiology. fact17: That percoid is not a angiology if this cirripede consults redefinition. fact18: That percoid troubles affix and/or it does not consult redefinition. fact19: If someone is not a muscle then that she does not consult redefinition or does not slash or both is wrong. fact20: The binding is not a kind of a honeycombed. ; $hypothesis$ = That this cirripede is not a kind of a angiology and does not trouble affix is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact16 & fact4 -> int1: This cirripede is not a kind of a angiology.; fact5 -> int2: This cirripede is not a angiology and she does not trouble affix if she is not a angiology.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and is not a kind of a significance.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: This paretic is not a significance and the thing is not a Najd if this paretic is not Amerindic. fact2: That the mullet does not fair Berberidaceae hold. fact3: If this inferno is not a kind of a fatty it does not thieve and is not a kind of a Amianthum. fact4: This inferno is not camphoraceous. fact5: If either this inferno does not confuse or that does wreathat Taal or both then this Libra does not wreathat Taal. fact6: That doze is not a kind of a significance. fact7: If this inferno does not supercharge venerableness this inferno is not a plantigrade and this does not wreathat Taal. fact8: This inferno is a kind of non-Amerindic person that does not fair Berberidaceae. fact9: If that something does not master Ornithopoda and does confuse does not hold it does not confuse. fact10: This inferno does not wreathat Taal and does not tat Spallanzani if he does not shave promptitude. fact11: Something does not fair Berberidaceae and it does not calculate Manteodea if it does not wreathat Taal. fact12: If this inferno does not wreathat Taal then this inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and that thing is not a significance. fact13: If this inferno is not unsensational this inferno does not perplex Nefud and is not a kind of a clown. fact14: This grotesque does not fair Berberidaceae and is not parallel. fact15: This inferno does not wreathat Taal. fact16: Some man wreathes Taal and it is a clown if it is non-parallel. fact17: that Taal does not wreathis inferno. fact18: This inferno does not fair Berberidaceae. fact19: This inferno does not fair Berberidaceae if this inferno does not wreathat Taal. fact20: If that pudding does not confuse the diazonium does wreathat Taal and is a kind of a clown. fact21: The Sarawakian is not a significance. fact22: That this inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and it is not a significance is false if the diazonium does wreathat Taal. fact23: This inferno is not a noninterference and not a significance if this inferno is not a Ulvophyceae.

fact1: ¬{BA}{ip} -> (¬{AB}{ip} & ¬{JK}{ip}) fact2: ¬{AA}{ak} fact3: ¬{EB}{a} -> (¬{AL}{a} & ¬{JC}{a}) fact4: ¬{FD}{a} fact5: (¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{jg} fact6: ¬{AB}{r} fact7: ¬{IH}{a} -> (¬{IA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact8: (¬{BA}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact10: ¬{GO}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{U}{a}) fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{DP}x) fact12: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact13: ¬{DI}{a} -> (¬{M}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact14: (¬{AA}{cr} & ¬{D}{cr}) fact15: ¬{A}{a} fact16: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact17: ¬{AC}{aa} fact18: ¬{AA}{a} fact19: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact20: ¬{C}{c} -> ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact21: ¬{AB}{jk} fact22: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact23: ¬{CD}{a} -> (¬{GQ}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

That this inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and is not a kind of a significance is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This paretic is not a significance and the thing is not a Najd if this paretic is not Amerindic. fact2: That the mullet does not fair Berberidaceae hold. fact3: If this inferno is not a kind of a fatty it does not thieve and is not a kind of a Amianthum. fact4: This inferno is not camphoraceous. fact5: If either this inferno does not confuse or that does wreathat Taal or both then this Libra does not wreathat Taal. fact6: That doze is not a kind of a significance. fact7: If this inferno does not supercharge venerableness this inferno is not a plantigrade and this does not wreathat Taal. fact8: This inferno is a kind of non-Amerindic person that does not fair Berberidaceae. fact9: If that something does not master Ornithopoda and does confuse does not hold it does not confuse. fact10: This inferno does not wreathat Taal and does not tat Spallanzani if he does not shave promptitude. fact11: Something does not fair Berberidaceae and it does not calculate Manteodea if it does not wreathat Taal. fact12: If this inferno does not wreathat Taal then this inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and that thing is not a significance. fact13: If this inferno is not unsensational this inferno does not perplex Nefud and is not a kind of a clown. fact14: This grotesque does not fair Berberidaceae and is not parallel. fact15: This inferno does not wreathat Taal. fact16: Some man wreathes Taal and it is a clown if it is non-parallel. fact17: that Taal does not wreathis inferno. fact18: This inferno does not fair Berberidaceae. fact19: This inferno does not fair Berberidaceae if this inferno does not wreathat Taal. fact20: If that pudding does not confuse the diazonium does wreathat Taal and is a kind of a clown. fact21: The Sarawakian is not a significance. fact22: That this inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and it is not a significance is false if the diazonium does wreathat Taal. fact23: This inferno is not a noninterference and not a significance if this inferno is not a Ulvophyceae. ; $hypothesis$ = This inferno does not fair Berberidaceae and is not a kind of a significance. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This staving Turbatrix does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: This clean happens. fact2: This thwacking occurs. fact3: That the abusing smogginess occurs is prevented by that both that acidoticness and that Courting happens. fact4: Both that anestricness and this clean happens.

fact1: {B} fact2: {C} fact3: ({IC} & {AJ}) -> ¬{GN} fact4: ({A} & {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This clean happens. fact2: This thwacking occurs. fact3: That the abusing smogginess occurs is prevented by that both that acidoticness and that Courting happens. fact4: Both that anestricness and this clean happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This staving Turbatrix does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that both this programing maidenliness and that rusting Libreville happens is false.

¬({A} & {B})

fact1: The fact that that rusting Libreville happens hold. fact2: Both the shewing Trichophaga and this frisking discontinuity happens. fact3: This programing maidenliness happens. fact4: That trustfulness results in that both this place and this liaising happens. fact5: That this concentricalness happens is not wrong. fact6: That presuming Izanami occurs. fact7: That interlinealness occurs. fact8: That outsideness occurs if this place occurs. fact9: Both the undervaluing cachexy and the cottoning haematology occurs. fact10: The cottoning haematology happens. fact11: That that rusting Libreville happens is prevented by that outsideness. fact12: The bending sedateness occurs. fact13: That nonsignificantness happens. fact14: That fogging Gongora occurs. fact15: This stickball happens. fact16: That this expositing gradient occurs is right.

fact1: {B} fact2: ({EB} & {L}) fact3: {A} fact4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact5: {DE} fact6: {EF} fact7: {AJ} fact8: {D} -> {C} fact9: ({DK} & {CQ}) fact10: {CQ} fact11: {C} -> ¬{B} fact12: {J} fact13: {O} fact14: {GK} fact15: {HC} fact16: {BG}

This shakedownness happens.

{FE}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that rusting Libreville happens hold. fact2: Both the shewing Trichophaga and this frisking discontinuity happens. fact3: This programing maidenliness happens. fact4: That trustfulness results in that both this place and this liaising happens. fact5: That this concentricalness happens is not wrong. fact6: That presuming Izanami occurs. fact7: That interlinealness occurs. fact8: That outsideness occurs if this place occurs. fact9: Both the undervaluing cachexy and the cottoning haematology occurs. fact10: The cottoning haematology happens. fact11: That that rusting Libreville happens is prevented by that outsideness. fact12: The bending sedateness occurs. fact13: That nonsignificantness happens. fact14: That fogging Gongora occurs. fact15: This stickball happens. fact16: That this expositing gradient occurs is right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that both this programing maidenliness and that rusting Libreville happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This forebodinging occurs but this leaving does not occurs.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This clearing glucosuria does not happens if the fact that both this PINNING usableness and that accelerating happens does not hold. fact2: That disaffecting Calcutta occurs if that chelateness occurs. fact3: That this epiduralness occurs and that chelateness occurs is triggered by that this clearing glucosuria does not happens. fact4: That both that non-joltyness and that non-citrousness occurs is false if that disaffecting Calcutta occurs. fact5: If the thermoelectricalness does not happens that that shedding and the ringing occurs is false. fact6: If this leaving occurs the fact that this joltiness does not happens is true. fact7: The fact that this rummage but notthe increasing cheekiness happens is wrong. fact8: Both this joltiness and this citrousness occurs. fact9: That chelateness occurs and/or this epiduralness occurs if this clearing glucosuria does not happens. fact10: This citrousness occurs. fact11: Both that counterterrorness and that receipting happens if this kotowing does not occurs. fact12: This joltiness and that non-citrousness happens if that disaffecting Calcutta happens. fact13: The consolidation but notthe supertwister happens. fact14: That the thermoelectricalness does not occurs and this habituation does not occurs is triggered by that counterterrorness. fact15: If that shedding does not occurs that this PINNING usableness and that accelerating occurs does not hold. fact16: That shedding does not occurs if that that that shedding occurs and the ringing occurs is correct does not hold. fact17: That that this forebodinging occurs and this leaving occurs is true is incorrect. fact18: The bifurcating but notthat latheriness occurs if this citrousness does not happens. fact19: That gesturing Nelumbonaceae does not occurs if the fact that the pubicness but notthe digitalization happens does not hold. fact20: If the fact that this forebodinging but notthis leaving occurs does not hold that this joltiness does not happens hold. fact21: If the fact that both that non-joltyness and that non-citrousness occurs is wrong then this citrousness happens. fact22: This leaving does not occurs.

fact1: ¬({G} & {I}) -> ¬{F} fact2: {D} -> {C} fact3: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {D}) fact4: {C} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact5: ¬{L} -> ¬({J} & {K}) fact6: {AB} -> ¬{B} fact7: ¬({AS} & ¬{BC}) fact8: ({B} & {A}) fact9: ¬{F} -> ({D} v {E}) fact10: {A} fact11: ¬{P} -> ({N} & {O}) fact12: {C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) fact13: ({GP} & ¬{GE}) fact14: {N} -> (¬{L} & ¬{M}) fact15: ¬{J} -> ¬({G} & {I}) fact16: ¬({J} & {K}) -> ¬{J} fact17: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact18: ¬{A} -> ({HC} & ¬{H}) fact19: ¬({DO} & ¬{HQ}) -> ¬{T} fact20: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact21: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {A} fact22: ¬{AB}

The bifurcating happens but that latheriness does not occurs.

({HC} & ¬{H})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This clearing glucosuria does not happens if the fact that both this PINNING usableness and that accelerating happens does not hold. fact2: That disaffecting Calcutta occurs if that chelateness occurs. fact3: That this epiduralness occurs and that chelateness occurs is triggered by that this clearing glucosuria does not happens. fact4: That both that non-joltyness and that non-citrousness occurs is false if that disaffecting Calcutta occurs. fact5: If the thermoelectricalness does not happens that that shedding and the ringing occurs is false. fact6: If this leaving occurs the fact that this joltiness does not happens is true. fact7: The fact that this rummage but notthe increasing cheekiness happens is wrong. fact8: Both this joltiness and this citrousness occurs. fact9: That chelateness occurs and/or this epiduralness occurs if this clearing glucosuria does not happens. fact10: This citrousness occurs. fact11: Both that counterterrorness and that receipting happens if this kotowing does not occurs. fact12: This joltiness and that non-citrousness happens if that disaffecting Calcutta happens. fact13: The consolidation but notthe supertwister happens. fact14: That the thermoelectricalness does not occurs and this habituation does not occurs is triggered by that counterterrorness. fact15: If that shedding does not occurs that this PINNING usableness and that accelerating occurs does not hold. fact16: That shedding does not occurs if that that that shedding occurs and the ringing occurs is correct does not hold. fact17: That that this forebodinging occurs and this leaving occurs is true is incorrect. fact18: The bifurcating but notthat latheriness occurs if this citrousness does not happens. fact19: That gesturing Nelumbonaceae does not occurs if the fact that the pubicness but notthe digitalization happens does not hold. fact20: If the fact that this forebodinging but notthis leaving occurs does not hold that this joltiness does not happens hold. fact21: If the fact that both that non-joltyness and that non-citrousness occurs is wrong then this citrousness happens. fact22: This leaving does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This forebodinging occurs but this leaving does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that this forebodinging occurs but this leaving does not occurs is incorrect.; fact20 & assump1 -> int1: This joltiness does not happens.; fact8 -> int2: This joltiness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That appendectomy but notthis Bhutanese happens.

({D} & ¬{B})

fact1: That disjunctiveness does not occurs if this cumulating but notthat lucubrating centimo occurs. fact2: The fact that this bawling infinitude does not happens and this epiphyticness does not occurs is incorrect if that publicising Hippocrepis occurs. fact3: That publicising Hippocrepis happens. fact4: That that appendectomy occurs but this Bhutanese does not happens is caused by that this Bhutanese does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that this bawling infinitude does not happens and this epiphyticness does not happens is wrong then the eyeing scarcity does not happens. fact6: That Mandeanness happens or this climaxing Yazoo does not occurs or both if that disjunctiveness happens. fact7: If the eyeing scarcity does not occurs both this cumulating and the excitableness happens. fact8: If that Mandeanness does not occurs or this climaxing Yazoo does not occurs or both then this Bhutanese does not occurs. fact9: This villainy does not happens or the chieftaincy does not occurs or both. fact10: That disjunctiveness occurs. fact11: If that disjunctiveness does not happens the fact that that that appendectomy happens and this Bhutanese does not happens is not correct hold. fact12: That that guggling happens is prevented by the contentedness and/or this non-Carthusianness. fact13: The funding Mobulidae does not occurs or that anathematisation does not occurs or both.

fact1: ({C} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{A} fact2: {N} -> ¬(¬{M} & ¬{L}) fact3: {N} fact4: ¬{B} -> ({D} & ¬{B}) fact5: ¬(¬{M} & ¬{L}) -> ¬{K} fact6: {A} -> ({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact7: ¬{K} -> ({C} & {J}) fact8: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact9: (¬{JJ} v ¬{CS}) fact10: {A} fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & ¬{B}) fact12: (¬{FI} v ¬{EQ}) -> ¬{DP} fact13: (¬{AS} v ¬{FE})

That that that appendectomy occurs but this Bhutanese does not happens does not hold is true.

¬({D} & ¬{B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That disjunctiveness does not occurs if this cumulating but notthat lucubrating centimo occurs. fact2: The fact that this bawling infinitude does not happens and this epiphyticness does not occurs is incorrect if that publicising Hippocrepis occurs. fact3: That publicising Hippocrepis happens. fact4: That that appendectomy occurs but this Bhutanese does not happens is caused by that this Bhutanese does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that this bawling infinitude does not happens and this epiphyticness does not happens is wrong then the eyeing scarcity does not happens. fact6: That Mandeanness happens or this climaxing Yazoo does not occurs or both if that disjunctiveness happens. fact7: If the eyeing scarcity does not occurs both this cumulating and the excitableness happens. fact8: If that Mandeanness does not occurs or this climaxing Yazoo does not occurs or both then this Bhutanese does not occurs. fact9: This villainy does not happens or the chieftaincy does not occurs or both. fact10: That disjunctiveness occurs. fact11: If that disjunctiveness does not happens the fact that that that appendectomy happens and this Bhutanese does not happens is not correct hold. fact12: That that guggling happens is prevented by the contentedness and/or this non-Carthusianness. fact13: The funding Mobulidae does not occurs or that anathematisation does not occurs or both. ; $hypothesis$ = That appendectomy but notthis Bhutanese happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That dicer does not sun usufruct.

¬{A}{c}

fact1: The fact that that dicer does not sun usufruct hold if that that sub is amphiprotic or this person is a Excalibur or both is false. fact2: That sub does not ooze alexia if that heath is not mesonic and does not ooze alexia. fact3: That slipcover is not hircine if that that sub is not a Excalibur but non-amphiprotic is wrong. fact4: If something does not ooze alexia that it is not a Excalibur and it is non-amphiprotic is not right. fact5: That that dicer is not a Pongidae and is harsh is wrong if Quinton is not unready. fact6: This Pavlova is a flavour and it is demagogical if this Pavlova is not a durability. fact7: If that this Pavlova is a kind of a wasting and it is unready is false this Pavlova is not unready. fact8: That that heath is amphiprotic hold if that sub is not a kind of a untruthfulness. fact9: If that someone courses immutableness is correct then that one is a kind of non-mesonic one that does not ooze alexia. fact10: That heath is amphiprotic if that sub is not a untruthfulness and/or is not earlier. fact11: That this Pavlova is a kind of a wasting and it is unready does not hold. fact12: If that heath is amphiprotic then that dicer suns usufruct. fact13: If this Pavlova is both ready and a flavour Quinton is not ready. fact14: That heath does course immutableness if the fact that that dicer is not a Pongidae and is harsh is false. fact15: That sub is not a untruthfulness and/or it is not earlier. fact16: That that heath is earlier hold.

fact1: ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact2: (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{CM}{ab} fact4: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact5: ¬{I}{d} -> ¬(¬{G}{c} & {H}{c}) fact6: ¬{L}{e} -> ({J}{e} & {K}{e}) fact7: ¬({M}{e} & {I}{e}) -> ¬{I}{e} fact8: ¬{AA}{a} -> {B}{b} fact9: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) fact10: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact11: ¬({M}{e} & {I}{e}) fact12: {B}{b} -> {A}{c} fact13: (¬{I}{e} & {J}{e}) -> ¬{I}{d} fact14: ¬(¬{G}{c} & {H}{c}) -> {F}{b} fact15: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact16: {AB}{b}

That slipcover is not hircine or it does not sun usufruct or both.

(¬{CM}{ab} v ¬{A}{ab})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that dicer does not sun usufruct hold if that that sub is amphiprotic or this person is a Excalibur or both is false. fact2: That sub does not ooze alexia if that heath is not mesonic and does not ooze alexia. fact3: That slipcover is not hircine if that that sub is not a Excalibur but non-amphiprotic is wrong. fact4: If something does not ooze alexia that it is not a Excalibur and it is non-amphiprotic is not right. fact5: That that dicer is not a Pongidae and is harsh is wrong if Quinton is not unready. fact6: This Pavlova is a flavour and it is demagogical if this Pavlova is not a durability. fact7: If that this Pavlova is a kind of a wasting and it is unready is false this Pavlova is not unready. fact8: That that heath is amphiprotic hold if that sub is not a kind of a untruthfulness. fact9: If that someone courses immutableness is correct then that one is a kind of non-mesonic one that does not ooze alexia. fact10: That heath is amphiprotic if that sub is not a untruthfulness and/or is not earlier. fact11: That this Pavlova is a kind of a wasting and it is unready does not hold. fact12: If that heath is amphiprotic then that dicer suns usufruct. fact13: If this Pavlova is both ready and a flavour Quinton is not ready. fact14: That heath does course immutableness if the fact that that dicer is not a Pongidae and is harsh is false. fact15: That sub is not a untruthfulness and/or it is not earlier. fact16: That that heath is earlier hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That dicer does not sun usufruct. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact15 -> int1: That heath is not non-amphiprotic.; int1 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this nurse is a paramedical that does not infract frambesia is wrong.

¬({A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa})

fact1: This nurse is non-interspecies if it does not appreciate interdict and it does not environ Ranunculaceae. fact2: If this nurse is not immunotherapeutic this nurse is a paramedical. fact3: This nurse does not environ Ranunculaceae. fact4: Someone is a paramedical if it is not immunotherapeutic. fact5: this Ranunculaceae does not environ nurse. fact6: Something is a kind of a OED that does not Bull Greenville if it is not cerebrospinal. fact7: This nurse is a paramedical. fact8: This nurse is not particularistic. fact9: This scope is not a paramedical. fact10: This nurse is not a inconsequence. fact11: If something is a kind of non-particularistic thing that does not environ Ranunculaceae it is not immunotherapeutic. fact12: Something is a paramedical but that does not infract frambesia if that is not immunotherapeutic.

fact1: (¬{AH}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{EM}{aa} fact2: ¬{B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} fact3: ¬{AB}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x fact5: ¬{AC}{ab} fact6: (x): ¬{BE}x -> ({AN}x & ¬{DH}x) fact7: {A}{aa} fact8: ¬{AA}{aa} fact9: ¬{A}{br} fact10: ¬{H}{aa} fact11: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{C}x)

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This nurse is non-interspecies if it does not appreciate interdict and it does not environ Ranunculaceae. fact2: If this nurse is not immunotherapeutic this nurse is a paramedical. fact3: This nurse does not environ Ranunculaceae. fact4: Someone is a paramedical if it is not immunotherapeutic. fact5: this Ranunculaceae does not environ nurse. fact6: Something is a kind of a OED that does not Bull Greenville if it is not cerebrospinal. fact7: This nurse is a paramedical. fact8: This nurse is not particularistic. fact9: This scope is not a paramedical. fact10: This nurse is not a inconsequence. fact11: If something is a kind of non-particularistic thing that does not environ Ranunculaceae it is not immunotherapeutic. fact12: Something is a paramedical but that does not infract frambesia if that is not immunotherapeutic. ; $hypothesis$ = That this nurse is a paramedical that does not infract frambesia is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> int1: This nurse is not immunotherapeutic if that is a kind of non-particularistic thing that does not environ Ranunculaceae.; fact8 & fact3 -> int2: This nurse is not particularistic and it does not environ Ranunculaceae.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This nurse is not immunotherapeutic.; fact12 -> int4: This nurse is a paramedical but this thing does not infract frambesia if this nurse is not immunotherapeutic.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That phenol outstays Photoblepharon and is not a Allionia.

({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: The fact that that phenol outstays Photoblepharon and is not a Allionia if that ship does not outstays Photoblepharon is right. fact2: If that ship does not outstay Photoblepharon then that phenol does outstay Photoblepharon. fact3: If someone is a Pelecaniformes it is not a kind of a asexuality. fact4: That ship is a kind of a asexuality and does not outstay Photoblepharon. fact5: If that ship is not a kind of a asexuality then that that phenol outstays Photoblepharon but it is not a Allionia does not hold.

fact1: ¬{B}{a} -> ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact2: ¬{B}{a} -> {B}{b} fact3: (x): {C}x -> ¬{A}x fact4: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

That that phenol outstays Photoblepharon but it is not a kind of a Allionia is incorrect.

¬({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that phenol outstays Photoblepharon and is not a Allionia if that ship does not outstays Photoblepharon is right. fact2: If that ship does not outstay Photoblepharon then that phenol does outstay Photoblepharon. fact3: If someone is a Pelecaniformes it is not a kind of a asexuality. fact4: That ship is a kind of a asexuality and does not outstay Photoblepharon. fact5: If that ship is not a kind of a asexuality then that that phenol outstays Photoblepharon but it is not a Allionia does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That phenol outstays Photoblepharon and is not a Allionia. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: That ship does not outstay Photoblepharon.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This appurtenance is not non-Congregational if it does spoil Septobasidiaceae.

{B}{a} -> {C}{a}

fact1: This barrette is not a photolithography but it hypothecates Leucadendron. fact2: If this appurtenance sovietises Lippi it is latter. fact3: This appurtenance is a Boehme if this appurtenance is a photolithography. fact4: This appurtenance is a foundering. fact5: The eminence does not spoil Septobasidiaceae if there exists something such that that it does spoil Septobasidiaceae and is not a photolithography is false. fact6: If that cactus is not sectarian that is not a kind of a Rhodophyta. fact7: This appurtenance is a kind of a blinded. fact8: That the gladiator is not alkaloidal but he is sulcate is not correct. fact9: If the sternutatory is not a kind of a bakshish but it is a kind of a photolithography then the fact that it does inventory anoxia is correct. fact10: This appurtenance is not a photolithography. fact11: That this appurtenance spoils Septobasidiaceae and is not a photolithography is not right if that rauwolfia is not Congregational. fact12: If that the gladiator is not alkaloidal but it is sulcate is wrong the fact that that cactus is not sectarian is not false. fact13: If some person is not a kind of a photolithography and spoils Septobasidiaceae it is Congregational. fact14: Lane outranges scansion if it interiorises Chimera. fact15: The fact that somebody does not administer Vaughan and ponders Polyergus is incorrect if the fact that he is not congressional hold. fact16: Something is non-Congregational if that it does not administer Vaughan and it ponders Polyergus does not hold.

fact1: (¬{A}{hn} & {BQ}{hn}) fact2: {JF}{a} -> {R}{a} fact3: {A}{a} -> {P}{a} fact4: {M}{a} fact5: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}{fs} fact6: ¬{I}{c} -> ¬{H}{c} fact7: {BS}{a} fact8: ¬(¬{J}{d} & {K}{d}) fact9: (¬{EG}{ii} & {A}{ii}) -> {GR}{ii} fact10: ¬{A}{a} fact11: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact12: ¬(¬{J}{d} & {K}{d}) -> ¬{I}{c} fact13: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {C}x fact14: {HT}{ch} -> {GO}{ch} fact15: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) fact16: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x

The eminence does not spoil Septobasidiaceae.

¬{B}{fs}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This barrette is not a photolithography but it hypothecates Leucadendron. fact2: If this appurtenance sovietises Lippi it is latter. fact3: This appurtenance is a Boehme if this appurtenance is a photolithography. fact4: This appurtenance is a foundering. fact5: The eminence does not spoil Septobasidiaceae if there exists something such that that it does spoil Septobasidiaceae and is not a photolithography is false. fact6: If that cactus is not sectarian that is not a kind of a Rhodophyta. fact7: This appurtenance is a kind of a blinded. fact8: That the gladiator is not alkaloidal but he is sulcate is not correct. fact9: If the sternutatory is not a kind of a bakshish but it is a kind of a photolithography then the fact that it does inventory anoxia is correct. fact10: This appurtenance is not a photolithography. fact11: That this appurtenance spoils Septobasidiaceae and is not a photolithography is not right if that rauwolfia is not Congregational. fact12: If that the gladiator is not alkaloidal but it is sulcate is wrong the fact that that cactus is not sectarian is not false. fact13: If some person is not a kind of a photolithography and spoils Septobasidiaceae it is Congregational. fact14: Lane outranges scansion if it interiorises Chimera. fact15: The fact that somebody does not administer Vaughan and ponders Polyergus is incorrect if the fact that he is not congressional hold. fact16: Something is non-Congregational if that it does not administer Vaughan and it ponders Polyergus does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This appurtenance is not non-Congregational if it does spoil Septobasidiaceae. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this appurtenance spoils Septobasidiaceae.; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: This appurtenance is not a kind of a photolithography and does spoil Septobasidiaceae.; fact13 -> int2: If this appurtenance is not a photolithography but it spoils Septobasidiaceae then it is Congregational.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This appurtenance is Congregational.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this tsaritsa is a Quaoar and is not alterable is incorrect.

¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: If that this tsaritsa is unmarried and not unalterable does not hold it is not unalterable. fact2: Something is not alterable and that thing is not transuranic if that thing is not a kind of a Quaoar. fact3: This tsaritsa is transuranic if that favus is a ANO. fact4: The birdhouse is a strand that does not gray plural if the saltation is a hull. fact5: If this arete is not unaccommodating this arete is a kind of an em and it is a hull. fact6: If that someone is both not a ANO and a Quaoar does not hold that person is not a kind of a Quaoar. fact7: If that flasher is not a Y2K and not a ANO that favus is a ANO. fact8: That this tsaritsa is unmarried and it is alterable is wrong. fact9: This arete is not unaccommodating. fact10: This tsaritsa is transuranic and that thing is a Quaoar. fact11: If this tsaritsa is unmarried that that hypoblast is both not a ANO and a Quaoar does not hold. fact12: Some person is not a Y2K and she/he is not a kind of a ANO if she/he is not unmarried. fact13: If this arete is a hull then that the saltation is a hull hold.

fact1: ¬({E}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact3: {D}{b} -> {A}{a} fact4: {I}{e} -> ({G}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) fact5: ¬{K}{f} -> ({J}{f} & {I}{f}) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (¬{F}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {D}{b} fact8: ¬({E}{a} & {C}{a}) fact9: ¬{K}{f} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: {E}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{gn} & {B}{gn}) fact12: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{D}x) fact13: {I}{f} -> {I}{e}

The fact that this tsaritsa is a Quaoar and is not alterable is incorrect.

¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this tsaritsa is unmarried and not unalterable does not hold it is not unalterable. fact2: Something is not alterable and that thing is not transuranic if that thing is not a kind of a Quaoar. fact3: This tsaritsa is transuranic if that favus is a ANO. fact4: The birdhouse is a strand that does not gray plural if the saltation is a hull. fact5: If this arete is not unaccommodating this arete is a kind of an em and it is a hull. fact6: If that someone is both not a ANO and a Quaoar does not hold that person is not a kind of a Quaoar. fact7: If that flasher is not a Y2K and not a ANO that favus is a ANO. fact8: That this tsaritsa is unmarried and it is alterable is wrong. fact9: This arete is not unaccommodating. fact10: This tsaritsa is transuranic and that thing is a Quaoar. fact11: If this tsaritsa is unmarried that that hypoblast is both not a ANO and a Quaoar does not hold. fact12: Some person is not a Y2K and she/he is not a kind of a ANO if she/he is not unmarried. fact13: If this arete is a hull then that the saltation is a hull hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this tsaritsa is a Quaoar and is not alterable is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: This tsaritsa is a Quaoar.; fact8 & fact1 -> int2: This tsaritsa is not alterable.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there exists no man such that he/she is not a Balzac and he/she is not a Lindbergh does not hold.

¬((x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: There exists no one such that it does not kidnap dishonour and it does not rasterize canicule. fact2: There is nothing such that it is both a Balzac and not a Lindbergh. fact3: There exists no man that does not subpoena brevity and is not irrecoverable. fact4: There is no man such that it is both not glandular and not achenial. fact5: There exists nobody such that it does not reposition pachyderma and is not irrecoverable. fact6: There exists no person that is non-biquadratic person that does not unbar Phalaropidae. fact7: There exists no man such that this one does not cool docket and is not a Ariomma. fact8: There exists nobody such that it is not a kind of a continent and it does not scoff. fact9: There is no man that does not impart Euglenaceae and does not shame shortness. fact10: There exists nothing that is not a Balzac but a Lindbergh. fact11: There exists none that is not exacting and is not attritional. fact12: There exists nothing such that that thing is not oblate and that thing does not reposition pachyderma. fact13: There exists nothing that does not propose and is non-annunciatory. fact14: There exists nobody such that it does not multiply and is not monecious. fact15: There is no person such that the person is not a Nacimiento and the person does not deign Manson. fact16: There is no one such that it is not integumentary and it is not flattering. fact17: There is nothing such that it does not enamour geminate and it is not energetic. fact18: There exists no person that is not legible and can nott anencephalia.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{GK}x & ¬{CQ}x) fact2: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (x): ¬(¬{GC}x & ¬{FQ}x) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{HC}x & ¬{DT}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{JG}x & ¬{FQ}x) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{DI}x & ¬{GQ}x) fact7: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{D}x) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{HD}x & ¬{HU}x) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{DG}x & ¬{FI}x) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{FE}x & ¬{DJ}x) fact12: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{JG}x) fact13: (x): ¬(¬{FD}x & ¬{CO}x) fact14: (x): ¬(¬{O}x & ¬{BR}x) fact15: (x): ¬(¬{AQ}x & ¬{FN}x) fact16: (x): ¬(¬{DP}x & ¬{GU}x) fact17: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{BI}x) fact18: (x): ¬(¬{HK}x & ¬{GH}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists no one such that it does not kidnap dishonour and it does not rasterize canicule. fact2: There is nothing such that it is both a Balzac and not a Lindbergh. fact3: There exists no man that does not subpoena brevity and is not irrecoverable. fact4: There is no man such that it is both not glandular and not achenial. fact5: There exists nobody such that it does not reposition pachyderma and is not irrecoverable. fact6: There exists no person that is non-biquadratic person that does not unbar Phalaropidae. fact7: There exists no man such that this one does not cool docket and is not a Ariomma. fact8: There exists nobody such that it is not a kind of a continent and it does not scoff. fact9: There is no man that does not impart Euglenaceae and does not shame shortness. fact10: There exists nothing that is not a Balzac but a Lindbergh. fact11: There exists none that is not exacting and is not attritional. fact12: There exists nothing such that that thing is not oblate and that thing does not reposition pachyderma. fact13: There exists nothing that does not propose and is non-annunciatory. fact14: There exists nobody such that it does not multiply and is not monecious. fact15: There is no person such that the person is not a Nacimiento and the person does not deign Manson. fact16: There is no one such that it is not integumentary and it is not flattering. fact17: There is nothing such that it does not enamour geminate and it is not energetic. fact18: There exists no person that is not legible and can nott anencephalia. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists no man such that he/she is not a Balzac and he/she is not a Lindbergh does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that everything fructifies is false.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Every man links siemens. fact2: Every person plagiarises acorea. fact3: Everything is exact. fact4: Every person is unarticulate. fact5: Everything is a Psalm. fact6: Everyone deveins Qatar. fact7: Everything is a Panonychus. fact8: Everybody fructifies. fact9: If something fructifies the fact that it is a charivari is not incorrect. fact10: Something is a kind of a Polyprion if it fructifies. fact11: Everything is nascent. fact12: Everyone is utile. fact13: Everything is reversionary. fact14: The fact that everything is seismologic is true. fact15: That everything is a seventeen hold. fact16: Everything is a bloodguilt.

fact1: (x): {AF}x fact2: (x): {AP}x fact3: (x): {HE}x fact4: (x): {HQ}x fact5: (x): {E}x fact6: (x): {ES}x fact7: (x): {IC}x fact8: (x): {A}x fact9: (x): {A}x -> {CF}x fact10: (x): {A}x -> {BN}x fact11: (x): {GP}x fact12: (x): {HC}x fact13: (x): {HA}x fact14: (x): {DN}x fact15: (x): {AB}x fact16: (x): {GD}x

Everything is a charivari.

(x): {CF}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every man links siemens. fact2: Every person plagiarises acorea. fact3: Everything is exact. fact4: Every person is unarticulate. fact5: Everything is a Psalm. fact6: Everyone deveins Qatar. fact7: Everything is a Panonychus. fact8: Everybody fructifies. fact9: If something fructifies the fact that it is a charivari is not incorrect. fact10: Something is a kind of a Polyprion if it fructifies. fact11: Everything is nascent. fact12: Everyone is utile. fact13: Everything is reversionary. fact14: The fact that everything is seismologic is true. fact15: That everything is a seventeen hold. fact16: Everything is a bloodguilt. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everything fructifies is false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That coquette is not passerine.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If that Chartreuse is not a Petrarch and this person is not passerine that coquette is not passerine. fact2: If that coquette does not erupt Okeechobee then that coquette is passerine. fact3: If something is not walleyed then the thing is a kind of a Hypoxidaceae. fact4: That coquette does not erupt Okeechobee if that Chartreuse is both not a Gerbillinae and walleyed. fact5: If that Chartreuse is not a Petrarch it is not a Gerbillinae and it is walleyed. fact6: This hypophysis is not Alpine but that one is passerine. fact7: That Chartreuse is not a kind of a Petrarch.

fact1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact2: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{b} fact3: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {BA}x fact4: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact6: (¬{FE}{es} & {C}{es}) fact7: ¬{A}{a}

That coquette is not passerine.

¬{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that Chartreuse is not a Petrarch and this person is not passerine that coquette is not passerine. fact2: If that coquette does not erupt Okeechobee then that coquette is passerine. fact3: If something is not walleyed then the thing is a kind of a Hypoxidaceae. fact4: That coquette does not erupt Okeechobee if that Chartreuse is both not a Gerbillinae and walleyed. fact5: If that Chartreuse is not a Petrarch it is not a Gerbillinae and it is walleyed. fact6: This hypophysis is not Alpine but that one is passerine. fact7: That Chartreuse is not a kind of a Petrarch. ; $hypothesis$ = That coquette is not passerine. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact7 -> int1: That that Chartreuse is both not a Gerbillinae and not non-walleyed is right.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That coquette does not erupt Okeechobee.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That snuffbox is a kind of a 1728.

{A}{a}

fact1: That some person discerns bathos and he/she imagines postcode does not hold if he/she is not a Thomism. fact2: The conspirator is a 1728. fact3: That sicklepod is a filmed. fact4: A non-gladiatorial man is not a 1728 and is Eurocentric. fact5: The fact that some man is not a loonie but it is a kind of a Smilacaceae is false if it is not a swashbuckling. fact6: If that sicklepod is a filmed it is a corps. fact7: Some person is not a Thrace and this person is not sugary if this person is not a convertible. fact8: If that this labourer discerns bathos and it imagines postcode is wrong this aguacate is not a kind of a swashbuckling. fact9: That snuffbox is not gladiatorial and is not a 1728 if this aguacate is not Eurocentric. fact10: That snuffbox is a kind of a 1728. fact11: If that sicklepod is a corps that gimcrackery is not a convertible. fact12: If that snuffbox is not gladiatorial and not a 1728 this enemy is a 1728. fact13: If that some man is not a loonie and is a Smilacaceae is wrong it is not Eurocentric.

fact1: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬({H}x & {G}x) fact2: {A}{ck} fact3: {N}{e} fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x) fact5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) fact6: {N}{e} -> {M}{e} fact7: (x): ¬{L}x -> (¬{K}x & ¬{J}x) fact8: ¬({H}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact9: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact10: {A}{a} fact11: {M}{e} -> ¬{L}{d} fact12: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {A}{fa} fact13: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x

That snuffbox is not a kind of a 1728.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That some person discerns bathos and he/she imagines postcode does not hold if he/she is not a Thomism. fact2: The conspirator is a 1728. fact3: That sicklepod is a filmed. fact4: A non-gladiatorial man is not a 1728 and is Eurocentric. fact5: The fact that some man is not a loonie but it is a kind of a Smilacaceae is false if it is not a swashbuckling. fact6: If that sicklepod is a filmed it is a corps. fact7: Some person is not a Thrace and this person is not sugary if this person is not a convertible. fact8: If that this labourer discerns bathos and it imagines postcode is wrong this aguacate is not a kind of a swashbuckling. fact9: That snuffbox is not gladiatorial and is not a 1728 if this aguacate is not Eurocentric. fact10: That snuffbox is a kind of a 1728. fact11: If that sicklepod is a corps that gimcrackery is not a convertible. fact12: If that snuffbox is not gladiatorial and not a 1728 this enemy is a 1728. fact13: If that some man is not a loonie and is a Smilacaceae is wrong it is not Eurocentric. ; $hypothesis$ = That snuffbox is a kind of a 1728. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That jodhpurs is a shamed and frivolous.

({A}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: That jodhpurs is a Yekaterinoslav. fact2: That jodhpurs is a shamed and is pubertal.

fact1: {D}{a} fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That jodhpurs is a Yekaterinoslav. fact2: That jodhpurs is a shamed and is pubertal. ; $hypothesis$ = That jodhpurs is a shamed and frivolous. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Alex does not gas Dipladenia.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: If some person does not case profits and/or it is semiotic then it is not semiotic. fact2: If the fact that Alex does not gas Dipladenia and warehouses Ataturk is wrong then that Pyridium does warehouses Ataturk. fact3: If this gamebag wants then either Alex does not case profits or it is semiotic or both. fact4: The fact that that mortgager is not monatomic is true if that falsifier is not monatomic but the thing is obtrusive. fact5: If the fact that someone is pathological is true then that it does not gas Dipladenia and warehouses Ataturk is wrong. fact6: That something does not warehouse Ataturk and gases Dipladenia is incorrect if it is not pathological. fact7: If that falsifier is crustose that falsifier is not monatomic but that thing is obtrusive. fact8: This gamebag wants if that mortgager wants and is non-monatomic. fact9: That mortgager wants. fact10: Something is not pathological if that thing is semiotic. fact11: the Ataturk warehouses Alex. fact12: If Alex warehouses Ataturk then Alex gases Dipladenia. fact13: Alex warehouses Ataturk.

fact1: (x): (¬{E}x v {D}x) -> {D}x fact2: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {A}{hk} fact3: {F}{b} -> (¬{E}{a} v {D}{a}) fact4: (¬{G}{d} & {H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} fact5: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) fact6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) fact7: {I}{d} -> (¬{G}{d} & {H}{d}) fact8: ({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> {F}{b} fact9: {F}{c} fact10: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x fact11: {AA}{aa} fact12: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact13: {A}{a}

That Pyridium warehouses Ataturk.

{A}{hk}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person does not case profits and/or it is semiotic then it is not semiotic. fact2: If the fact that Alex does not gas Dipladenia and warehouses Ataturk is wrong then that Pyridium does warehouses Ataturk. fact3: If this gamebag wants then either Alex does not case profits or it is semiotic or both. fact4: The fact that that mortgager is not monatomic is true if that falsifier is not monatomic but the thing is obtrusive. fact5: If the fact that someone is pathological is true then that it does not gas Dipladenia and warehouses Ataturk is wrong. fact6: That something does not warehouse Ataturk and gases Dipladenia is incorrect if it is not pathological. fact7: If that falsifier is crustose that falsifier is not monatomic but that thing is obtrusive. fact8: This gamebag wants if that mortgager wants and is non-monatomic. fact9: That mortgager wants. fact10: Something is not pathological if that thing is semiotic. fact11: the Ataturk warehouses Alex. fact12: If Alex warehouses Ataturk then Alex gases Dipladenia. fact13: Alex warehouses Ataturk. ; $hypothesis$ = Alex does not gas Dipladenia. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this lansa is a laudableness is true.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Somebody does accept shielded if the fact that it is a slant and/or Cantons Mullus is false. fact2: If there exists something such that the fact that it reconnoiters Marx and it is apocarpous does not hold the fact that this lansa is not apocarpous is correct. fact3: That either something is an indifference or it is not unpolished or both does not hold if it does not reconnoiter Marx. fact4: If that this napoleon reconnoiters Marx and/or this person does not Confederate ESE does not hold then this napoleon clashes plumed. fact5: If that something is an indifference or it is not unpolished or both is incorrect it is a laudableness. fact6: Dorian is not unpolished. fact7: If the fact that this lansa reconnoiters Marx and/or is paperlike is not correct then it is a indolence. fact8: If the fact that the debaucher is a laudableness and/or is not a birdnesting is false the debaucher is Britannic. fact9: If something does not push that it does estrange Lindera or is not a poltroonery or both does not hold. fact10: The fact that either some man is a litre or the person is not a Belemnitidae or both is wrong if the person is not estrogenic. fact11: If there exists some man such that that it is hadal and it reconnoiters Marx is false then this lansa does not reconnoiters Marx. fact12: Some man that is not an obsession rimes Provos. fact13: If the fact that either something is a quango or it is not a public or both does not hold it is ungroomed. fact14: If that that homeless lodges Fumariaceae and/or is not a cheering is incorrect that homeless is emmetropic.

fact1: (x): ¬({GM}x v {GR}x) -> {CF}x fact2: (x): ¬({A}x & {ID}x) -> ¬{ID}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact4: ¬({A}{ab} v ¬{DD}{ab}) -> {HT}{ab} fact5: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact6: ¬{AB}{bn} fact7: ¬({A}{aa} v {HS}{aa}) -> {DL}{aa} fact8: ¬({B}{bl} v ¬{AI}{bl}) -> {HJ}{bl} fact9: (x): ¬{IM}x -> ¬({M}x v ¬{AN}x) fact10: (x): ¬{FO}x -> ¬({T}x v ¬{CS}x) fact11: (x): ¬({D}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact12: (x): ¬{EB}x -> {BP}x fact13: (x): ¬({IO}x v ¬{BM}x) -> {FT}x fact14: ¬({JE}{ip} v ¬{FK}{ip}) -> {JJ}{ip}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody does accept shielded if the fact that it is a slant and/or Cantons Mullus is false. fact2: If there exists something such that the fact that it reconnoiters Marx and it is apocarpous does not hold the fact that this lansa is not apocarpous is correct. fact3: That either something is an indifference or it is not unpolished or both does not hold if it does not reconnoiter Marx. fact4: If that this napoleon reconnoiters Marx and/or this person does not Confederate ESE does not hold then this napoleon clashes plumed. fact5: If that something is an indifference or it is not unpolished or both is incorrect it is a laudableness. fact6: Dorian is not unpolished. fact7: If the fact that this lansa reconnoiters Marx and/or is paperlike is not correct then it is a indolence. fact8: If the fact that the debaucher is a laudableness and/or is not a birdnesting is false the debaucher is Britannic. fact9: If something does not push that it does estrange Lindera or is not a poltroonery or both does not hold. fact10: The fact that either some man is a litre or the person is not a Belemnitidae or both is wrong if the person is not estrogenic. fact11: If there exists some man such that that it is hadal and it reconnoiters Marx is false then this lansa does not reconnoiters Marx. fact12: Some man that is not an obsession rimes Provos. fact13: If the fact that either something is a quango or it is not a public or both does not hold it is ungroomed. fact14: If that that homeless lodges Fumariaceae and/or is not a cheering is incorrect that homeless is emmetropic. ; $hypothesis$ = That this lansa is a laudableness is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This bread is a Alcibiades but that is not a kind of a gradual.

({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: There exists some man such that he is a kind of a well. fact2: That ex does not implore if that one is a madness and does not unsnarl numerousness. fact3: The fact that either some person is not a madness or she unsnarls numerousness or both is wrong if she is a delirium. fact4: If the fact that somebody is not a Alcibiades but it is a Sabal does not hold then it is cathodic. fact5: If Alec premieres liked then Alec is non-noneffervescent thing that does not sashay prattle. fact6: If there exists someone such that he/she is a Sabal this bread is a kind of a Alcibiades that is not a gradual. fact7: Alec besieges ratables. fact8: This misogamist is a kind of a Sabal. fact9: If Alec does besiege ratables then Alec premieres liked. fact10: If Alec is not a partial then it is a delirium. fact11: If Alec is not noneffervescent it is not exegetic and it is not a partial. fact12: The fact that this bread is not a Alcibiades but that thing is a kind of a Sabal does not hold if that pommel is not a gradual. fact13: If that pommel does not implore then this bread is a Sabal and it shells adhesiveness. fact14: That pommel does not implore if the fact that that ex does not unsnarl numerousness is true. fact15: This bread is not a gradual. fact16: If there is some person such that it is a Sabal then this bread is not a gradual. fact17: The fact that that ex is not a kind of a delirium hold. fact18: If the fact that something is a Sabal hold that this is a Alcibiades and this is not a kind of a gradual is wrong.

fact1: (Ex): {EE}x fact2: ({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{c} fact3: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x v {F}x) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {GP}x fact5: {M}{d} -> (¬{K}{d} & ¬{L}{d}) fact6: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact7: {N}{d} fact8: {A}{aa} fact9: {N}{d} -> {M}{d} fact10: ¬{I}{d} -> {H}{d} fact11: ¬{K}{d} -> (¬{J}{d} & ¬{I}{d}) fact12: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact13: ¬{E}{b} -> ({A}{a} & {D}{a}) fact14: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬{E}{b} fact15: ¬{C}{a} fact16: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} fact17: ¬{H}{c} fact18: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x)

There is someone such that it is cathodic.

(Ex): {GP}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some man such that he is a kind of a well. fact2: That ex does not implore if that one is a madness and does not unsnarl numerousness. fact3: The fact that either some person is not a madness or she unsnarls numerousness or both is wrong if she is a delirium. fact4: If the fact that somebody is not a Alcibiades but it is a Sabal does not hold then it is cathodic. fact5: If Alec premieres liked then Alec is non-noneffervescent thing that does not sashay prattle. fact6: If there exists someone such that he/she is a Sabal this bread is a kind of a Alcibiades that is not a gradual. fact7: Alec besieges ratables. fact8: This misogamist is a kind of a Sabal. fact9: If Alec does besiege ratables then Alec premieres liked. fact10: If Alec is not a partial then it is a delirium. fact11: If Alec is not noneffervescent it is not exegetic and it is not a partial. fact12: The fact that this bread is not a Alcibiades but that thing is a kind of a Sabal does not hold if that pommel is not a gradual. fact13: If that pommel does not implore then this bread is a Sabal and it shells adhesiveness. fact14: That pommel does not implore if the fact that that ex does not unsnarl numerousness is true. fact15: This bread is not a gradual. fact16: If there is some person such that it is a Sabal then this bread is not a gradual. fact17: The fact that that ex is not a kind of a delirium hold. fact18: If the fact that something is a Sabal hold that this is a Alcibiades and this is not a kind of a gradual is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This bread is a Alcibiades but that is not a kind of a gradual. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: The fact that there exists someone such that it is a kind of a Sabal is true.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This guile happens.

{A}

fact1: The fact that if that this surface does not happens is true the fact that that unhelpfulness but notthat scalding Blighia occurs is false is correct. fact2: This guile happens. fact3: That unhelpfulness does not occurs and that scalding Blighia does not happens if this surface occurs. fact4: The coursework happens. fact5: That Hunt does not occurs. fact6: If that scalding Blighia does not happens this basidialness does not occurs and this guile does not occurs. fact7: If this basidialness does not occurs then this guile occurs and that unorthodoxness occurs. fact8: That Asiaticness and that crayoning occurs if that misplay does not happens. fact9: That that Hunt does not occurs and this dominoes does not happens prevents that misplay. fact10: The palpation happens. fact11: That notthis surface but this hitting occurs is caused by that that Asiaticness occurs. fact12: That that crayoning and that misplay occurs results in that non-Asiaticness. fact13: That non-Asiaticness results in that both this hitting and this surface happens.

fact1: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & ¬{C}) fact2: {A} fact3: {E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{C}) fact4: {IM} fact5: ¬{J} fact6: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact7: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {DB}) fact8: ¬{I} -> ({G} & {H}) fact9: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} fact10: {FH} fact11: {G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) fact12: ({H} & {I}) -> ¬{G} fact13: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E})

This guile does not happens.

¬{A}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that if that this surface does not happens is true the fact that that unhelpfulness but notthat scalding Blighia occurs is false is correct. fact2: This guile happens. fact3: That unhelpfulness does not occurs and that scalding Blighia does not happens if this surface occurs. fact4: The coursework happens. fact5: That Hunt does not occurs. fact6: If that scalding Blighia does not happens this basidialness does not occurs and this guile does not occurs. fact7: If this basidialness does not occurs then this guile occurs and that unorthodoxness occurs. fact8: That Asiaticness and that crayoning occurs if that misplay does not happens. fact9: That that Hunt does not occurs and this dominoes does not happens prevents that misplay. fact10: The palpation happens. fact11: That notthis surface but this hitting occurs is caused by that that Asiaticness occurs. fact12: That that crayoning and that misplay occurs results in that non-Asiaticness. fact13: That non-Asiaticness results in that both this hitting and this surface happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This guile happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That rube does not untwist averageness.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That that rube is arborous hold if that measure untwists averageness. fact2: that Fayetteville does not defeat measure. fact3: That measure does not defeat Fayetteville. fact4: Somebody does not untwist averageness if the fact that it is not a kind of a Catalan and it untwist averageness is wrong. fact5: If that measure is arborous and/or that thing is not unsociable then that rube untwists averageness. fact6: That rube is trigonometric and/or that is not unsociable. fact7: If the fact that some person is basinal and not a Rallidae does not hold then he is not androgenetic. fact8: If this hotbox is not colour that this hotbox is basinal but it is not a kind of a Rallidae does not hold. fact9: If that measure untwists averageness and/or it does not defeat Fayetteville then that rube is unsociable. fact10: If that measure either is arborous or does not untwist averageness or both that rube defeats Fayetteville. fact11: That rube defeats Fayetteville if that measure untwists averageness. fact12: If that measure untwists averageness and/or it is not arborous that rube defeats Fayetteville. fact13: That measure is arborous if that rube untwists averageness and/or is not unsociable. fact14: That measure either is arborous or is not unsociable or both if that measure does not defeat Fayetteville. fact15: Either that rube untwists averageness or this thing is not arborous or both. fact16: Something defeats Fayetteville or the thing is not a Catalan or both if the thing chelateds OH. fact17: Chino untwists averageness. fact18: That rube is theosophical if this hotbox is not androgenetic. fact19: If that rube is theosophical the fact that that measure chelateds OH hold.

fact1: {B}{a} -> {AA}{b} fact2: ¬{AC}{aa} fact3: ¬{A}{a} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact6: ({CQ}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) fact7: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact8: ¬{I}{c} -> ¬({G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) fact9: ({B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{b} fact10: ({AA}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact11: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact12: ({B}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact13: ({B}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> {AA}{a} fact14: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact15: ({B}{b} v ¬{AA}{b}) fact16: (x): {D}x -> ({A}x v ¬{C}x) fact17: {B}{hp} fact18: ¬{F}{c} -> {E}{b} fact19: {E}{b} -> {D}{a}

That rube does not untwist averageness.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that rube is arborous hold if that measure untwists averageness. fact2: that Fayetteville does not defeat measure. fact3: That measure does not defeat Fayetteville. fact4: Somebody does not untwist averageness if the fact that it is not a kind of a Catalan and it untwist averageness is wrong. fact5: If that measure is arborous and/or that thing is not unsociable then that rube untwists averageness. fact6: That rube is trigonometric and/or that is not unsociable. fact7: If the fact that some person is basinal and not a Rallidae does not hold then he is not androgenetic. fact8: If this hotbox is not colour that this hotbox is basinal but it is not a kind of a Rallidae does not hold. fact9: If that measure untwists averageness and/or it does not defeat Fayetteville then that rube is unsociable. fact10: If that measure either is arborous or does not untwist averageness or both that rube defeats Fayetteville. fact11: That rube defeats Fayetteville if that measure untwists averageness. fact12: If that measure untwists averageness and/or it is not arborous that rube defeats Fayetteville. fact13: That measure is arborous if that rube untwists averageness and/or is not unsociable. fact14: That measure either is arborous or is not unsociable or both if that measure does not defeat Fayetteville. fact15: Either that rube untwists averageness or this thing is not arborous or both. fact16: Something defeats Fayetteville or the thing is not a Catalan or both if the thing chelateds OH. fact17: Chino untwists averageness. fact18: That rube is theosophical if this hotbox is not androgenetic. fact19: If that rube is theosophical the fact that that measure chelateds OH hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That rube does not untwist averageness. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact3 -> int1: That that measure is arborous and/or is not unsociable is correct.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That snobbishness occurs.

{D}

fact1: If that the televangelism happens hold then the fact that this K.E. happens hold. fact2: This disparagement does not happens and that intralinguisticness does not occurs if that bating does not happens. fact3: That notthe accepting but this voting occurs does not hold if that intralinguisticness does not occurs. fact4: If this K.E. happens and this voting happens then that snobbishness does not happens. fact5: Both this voting and the accepting occurs. fact6: The fact that the televangelism happens hold.

fact1: {A} -> {B} fact2: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) fact3: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {C}) fact4: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact5: ({C} & {E}) fact6: {A}

That snobbishness occurs.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that the televangelism happens hold then the fact that this K.E. happens hold. fact2: This disparagement does not happens and that intralinguisticness does not occurs if that bating does not happens. fact3: That notthe accepting but this voting occurs does not hold if that intralinguisticness does not occurs. fact4: If this K.E. happens and this voting happens then that snobbishness does not happens. fact5: Both this voting and the accepting occurs. fact6: The fact that the televangelism happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That snobbishness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact6 -> int1: This K.E. happens.; fact5 -> int2: This voting happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This K.E. occurs and this voting occurs.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That hock is not a petechia.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That hock is dizygotic. fact2: That skiagraph is a petechia. fact3: Something does not ticktack marbled and it does not cock rehash if it does not cluck Colubridae. fact4: If this shlepper bulges Jensen then this airway bulges Jensen. fact5: If that hock is not a kind of a branchiopod then this sisal does not bulge Jensen. fact6: That hock is a kind of a petechia. fact7: That something is a kind of a petechia but this thing is not bionomical does not hold if this thing does not bulge Jensen. fact8: Someone that is not extraordinary either does vacate Blitzstein or is not a FEMA or both. fact9: Some man that is osseous and/or is a Houston is not a Nicaea. fact10: If something that is not a ascription does not ticktack marbled then it is not unobvious. fact11: If somebody is a kilowatt and/or it is not a ascription it is not a kind of a ascription. fact12: If the fact that that arbalest is not unobvious is true that hock is not a branchiopod and it is not a likeliness. fact13: This shlepper is not a rhyming. fact14: If the fact that this salade is a petechia but it is not bionomical is wrong that arbalest is not a kind of a petechia. fact15: This shlepper is an allies. fact16: This salade is osseous if this shlepper is both not a rhyming and an allies. fact17: Someone is a kind of a petechia that is bionomical if that it does not bulge Jensen is correct. fact18: That arbalest does not cluck Colubridae if this airway vacates Blitzstein or is not a kind of a FEMA or both. fact19: If this salade is not a Nicaea then that arbalest is a kilowatt and/or not a ascription. fact20: This airway is non-extraordinary. fact21: If this airway bulges Jensen this salade does not bulges Jensen.

fact1: {DD}{a} fact2: {A}{fs} fact3: (x): ¬{L}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{I}x) fact4: {C}{e} -> {C}{d} fact5: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{C}{dh} fact6: {A}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact8: (x): ¬{Q}x -> ({N}x v ¬{M}x) fact9: (x): ({P}x v {O}x) -> ¬{K}x fact10: (x): (¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x fact11: (x): ({J}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{H}x fact12: ¬{F}{b} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact13: ¬{S}{e} fact14: ¬({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact15: {R}{e} fact16: (¬{S}{e} & {R}{e}) -> {P}{c} fact17: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact18: ({N}{d} v ¬{M}{d}) -> ¬{L}{b} fact19: ¬{K}{c} -> ({J}{b} v ¬{H}{b}) fact20: ¬{Q}{d} fact21: {C}{d} -> ¬{C}{c}

This sisal is a petechia.

{A}{dh}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That hock is dizygotic. fact2: That skiagraph is a petechia. fact3: Something does not ticktack marbled and it does not cock rehash if it does not cluck Colubridae. fact4: If this shlepper bulges Jensen then this airway bulges Jensen. fact5: If that hock is not a kind of a branchiopod then this sisal does not bulge Jensen. fact6: That hock is a kind of a petechia. fact7: That something is a kind of a petechia but this thing is not bionomical does not hold if this thing does not bulge Jensen. fact8: Someone that is not extraordinary either does vacate Blitzstein or is not a FEMA or both. fact9: Some man that is osseous and/or is a Houston is not a Nicaea. fact10: If something that is not a ascription does not ticktack marbled then it is not unobvious. fact11: If somebody is a kilowatt and/or it is not a ascription it is not a kind of a ascription. fact12: If the fact that that arbalest is not unobvious is true that hock is not a branchiopod and it is not a likeliness. fact13: This shlepper is not a rhyming. fact14: If the fact that this salade is a petechia but it is not bionomical is wrong that arbalest is not a kind of a petechia. fact15: This shlepper is an allies. fact16: This salade is osseous if this shlepper is both not a rhyming and an allies. fact17: Someone is a kind of a petechia that is bionomical if that it does not bulge Jensen is correct. fact18: That arbalest does not cluck Colubridae if this airway vacates Blitzstein or is not a kind of a FEMA or both. fact19: If this salade is not a Nicaea then that arbalest is a kilowatt and/or not a ascription. fact20: This airway is non-extraordinary. fact21: If this airway bulges Jensen this salade does not bulges Jensen. ; $hypothesis$ = That hock is not a petechia. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This censorialness does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: If the whiplikeness does not occurs then this lying occurs but this killing Pseudaletia does not happens. fact2: That stopping Megapodius happens. fact3: That caution occurs. fact4: That Luxembourgianness but notthe grounder happens. fact5: This blandishing does not happens. fact6: If that cubitalness does not occurs that dampening Capsella happens. fact7: If the bridalness but notthe propaedeutics happens then the binucleatedness occurs. fact8: That leaning does not occurs. fact9: If that skimming crith does not occurs that idolization occurs but this circumvention does not occurs. fact10: That the going does not occurs results in that the constituting but notthe instauration occurs. fact11: This cursing happens. fact12: If that fronting does not happens that didactics but notthe toot occurs. fact13: That Circumcision does not occurs. fact14: That that mentalness occurs and that crossbreeding Cystopteris does not occurs is brought about by that this veneration does not happens. fact15: The wallop happens. fact16: That cosmogenicness occurs but this inclemency does not happens if that Circumcision does not occurs. fact17: This bathyalness occurs. fact18: The encroaching Saipan occurs if both the isentropicness and the non-Olympianness occurs. fact19: The slide does not occurs. fact20: The chipping but notthe coaching Pleistocene happens. fact21: That this sanitisation does not occurs is prevented by that the slide but notthe produce occurs. fact22: If that cosmogenicness but notthis inclemency happens the fact that this censorialness occurs is not false.

fact1: ¬{ID} -> ({HS} & ¬{CC}) fact2: {AS} fact3: {BM} fact4: ({JF} & ¬{E}) fact5: ¬{BD} fact6: ¬{CJ} -> {K} fact7: ({BK} & ¬{HC}) -> {GQ} fact8: ¬{N} fact9: ¬{FO} -> ({BT} & ¬{BP}) fact10: ¬{II} -> ({JA} & ¬{GD}) fact11: {CT} fact12: ¬{AT} -> ({EK} & ¬{EA}) fact13: ¬{A} fact14: ¬{IK} -> ({GJ} & ¬{G}) fact15: {IP} fact16: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact17: {FK} fact18: ({AG} & ¬{GS}) -> {DM} fact19: ¬{AN} fact20: ({CH} & ¬{EU}) fact21: ({AN} & ¬{CR}) -> {HP} fact22: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the whiplikeness does not occurs then this lying occurs but this killing Pseudaletia does not happens. fact2: That stopping Megapodius happens. fact3: That caution occurs. fact4: That Luxembourgianness but notthe grounder happens. fact5: This blandishing does not happens. fact6: If that cubitalness does not occurs that dampening Capsella happens. fact7: If the bridalness but notthe propaedeutics happens then the binucleatedness occurs. fact8: That leaning does not occurs. fact9: If that skimming crith does not occurs that idolization occurs but this circumvention does not occurs. fact10: That the going does not occurs results in that the constituting but notthe instauration occurs. fact11: This cursing happens. fact12: If that fronting does not happens that didactics but notthe toot occurs. fact13: That Circumcision does not occurs. fact14: That that mentalness occurs and that crossbreeding Cystopteris does not occurs is brought about by that this veneration does not happens. fact15: The wallop happens. fact16: That cosmogenicness occurs but this inclemency does not happens if that Circumcision does not occurs. fact17: This bathyalness occurs. fact18: The encroaching Saipan occurs if both the isentropicness and the non-Olympianness occurs. fact19: The slide does not occurs. fact20: The chipping but notthe coaching Pleistocene happens. fact21: That this sanitisation does not occurs is prevented by that the slide but notthe produce occurs. fact22: If that cosmogenicness but notthis inclemency happens the fact that this censorialness occurs is not false. ; $hypothesis$ = This censorialness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact13 -> int1: That cosmogenicness occurs but this inclemency does not happens.; int1 & fact22 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This marbling Hyperodontidae does not happens and that hieraticness does not occurs.

(¬{D} & ¬{E})

fact1: That the Javanness does not occurs and that bore does not occurs does not hold if that uncreativeness does not occurs. fact2: That that Liverpudlianness occurs but this score does not occurs prevents that this reshuffle happens. fact3: That the infringement does not happens causes that that Liverpudlianness happens but this score does not happens. fact4: This chyliferousness does not happens. fact5: If the supported does not occurs the fact that notthe savingsing but the Naziness happens does not hold. fact6: The fact that that splenectomy does not occurs and the straits does not happens is wrong. fact7: That this marbling Hyperodontidae but notthat hieraticness happens does not hold. fact8: That that Comstockery and that extrospectiveness occurs is brought about by that this reshuffle does not happens. fact9: If that grumbling does not occurs then this marbling Hyperodontidae does not happens and that hieraticness does not happens. fact10: That that grumbling and that humoring neighbourliness occurs leads to that that Pounding stoichiometry does not occurs. fact11: If that Comstockery happens notthat Pounding stoichiometry but that humoring neighbourliness happens. fact12: That humoring neighbourliness occurs. fact13: If that grumbling does not happens the fact that the fact that the leptosporangiateness does not happens and this issuing Heterostraci does not occurs does not hold is true. fact14: That grumbling occurs. fact15: If that that splenectomy does not happens is right then both this obstinateness and the cryptographicalness occurs. fact16: That notthat Pounding stoichiometry but that humoring neighbourliness occurs is brought about by that this marbling Hyperodontidae occurs. fact17: The fact that this marbling Hyperodontidae does not occurs and that hieraticness does not happens is incorrect if that Pounding stoichiometry does not happens. fact18: The botching schizophrenia happens and the harvesting happens. fact19: The infringement does not happens if both this obstinateness and the cryptographicalness happens.

fact1: ¬{CI} -> ¬(¬{HD} & ¬{HB}) fact2: ({I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact3: ¬{K} -> ({I} & ¬{J}) fact4: ¬{AD} fact5: ¬{EF} -> ¬(¬{CD} & {BS}) fact6: ¬(¬{N} & ¬{DA}) fact7: ¬({D} & ¬{E}) fact8: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact9: ¬{A} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact10: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact11: {F} -> (¬{C} & {B}) fact12: {B} fact13: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{GF} & ¬{DU}) fact14: {A} fact15: ¬{N} -> ({M} & {L}) fact16: {D} -> (¬{C} & {B}) fact17: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact18: ({IT} & {FQ}) fact19: ({M} & {L}) -> ¬{K}

The fact that the leptosporangiateness does not occurs and this issuing Heterostraci does not happens is false.

¬(¬{GF} & ¬{DU})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the Javanness does not occurs and that bore does not occurs does not hold if that uncreativeness does not occurs. fact2: That that Liverpudlianness occurs but this score does not occurs prevents that this reshuffle happens. fact3: That the infringement does not happens causes that that Liverpudlianness happens but this score does not happens. fact4: This chyliferousness does not happens. fact5: If the supported does not occurs the fact that notthe savingsing but the Naziness happens does not hold. fact6: The fact that that splenectomy does not occurs and the straits does not happens is wrong. fact7: That this marbling Hyperodontidae but notthat hieraticness happens does not hold. fact8: That that Comstockery and that extrospectiveness occurs is brought about by that this reshuffle does not happens. fact9: If that grumbling does not occurs then this marbling Hyperodontidae does not happens and that hieraticness does not happens. fact10: That that grumbling and that humoring neighbourliness occurs leads to that that Pounding stoichiometry does not occurs. fact11: If that Comstockery happens notthat Pounding stoichiometry but that humoring neighbourliness happens. fact12: That humoring neighbourliness occurs. fact13: If that grumbling does not happens the fact that the fact that the leptosporangiateness does not happens and this issuing Heterostraci does not occurs does not hold is true. fact14: That grumbling occurs. fact15: If that that splenectomy does not happens is right then both this obstinateness and the cryptographicalness occurs. fact16: That notthat Pounding stoichiometry but that humoring neighbourliness occurs is brought about by that this marbling Hyperodontidae occurs. fact17: The fact that this marbling Hyperodontidae does not occurs and that hieraticness does not happens is incorrect if that Pounding stoichiometry does not happens. fact18: The botching schizophrenia happens and the harvesting happens. fact19: The infringement does not happens if both this obstinateness and the cryptographicalness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This marbling Hyperodontidae does not happens and that hieraticness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact12 -> int1: Both that grumbling and that humoring neighbourliness happens.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That Pounding stoichiometry does not occurs.; int2 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this kiang is a correctitude or is a ureteritis or both is incorrect.

¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

fact1: Williams is consolable and it is a waste if the fact that it is not a praetorian is correct. fact2: That this meeting does shrink Verthandi but it is not infallible if this meeting does not belch oldness hold. fact3: The fact that if that somebody does belch oldness and shrinks Verthandi does not hold then this one is not consolable hold. fact4: That this meeting noses taxidermy is true. fact5: Williams maddens Tarsius. fact6: Everything does not fettle. fact7: This kiang is a waste or is a Bourgogne or both if this kiang does not madden Tarsius. fact8: Cat is not a kind of a waste. fact9: If that somebody does not stoop bilharzia hold then either it is a kind of a carboxyl or it is a kind of a spontaneousness or both. fact10: If Williams does not closet glitch then that Williams does belch oldness and it shrinks Verthandi does not hold. fact11: Everything is not bathyal. fact12: That someone is a praetorian and it is a waste does not hold if it is not infallible. fact13: If the fact that somebody is coeliac but it is not a arteritis does not hold then it is not infallible. fact14: Something is not a waste if that this is a praetorian and a waste is not true. fact15: Some person is a correctitude and/or this person is a kind of a ureteritis if this person is not a kind of a waste. fact16: If this meeting does nose taxidermy then Williams does not closet glitch and it does not tenant SW. fact17: The fact that everything is not a waste is true. fact18: Williams is not infallible if this meeting shrinks Verthandi but that thing is not infallible. fact19: If Williams is not a waste and not consolable that sandwichman is a bunkum. fact20: If this quinone is not a Woolworth then either this quinone domesticate enigma or it is a kind of a praetorian or both. fact21: The fact that that Williams is coeliac but the one is not a arteritis does not hold hold if Williams does madden Tarsius.

fact1: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact2: ¬{F}{b} -> ({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact3: (x): ¬({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: {I}{b} fact5: {L}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{DB}x fact7: ¬{L}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} v {FR}{aa}) fact8: ¬{A}{cb} fact9: (x): ¬{HL}x -> ({IA}x v {CE}x) fact10: ¬{G}{a} -> ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) fact11: (x): ¬{JC}x fact12: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) fact13: (x): ¬({K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{D}x fact14: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) fact16: {I}{b} -> (¬{G}{a} & ¬{H}{a}) fact17: (x): ¬{A}x fact18: ({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact19: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {AS}{ba} fact20: ¬{ET}{dh} -> ({JA}{dh} v {C}{dh}) fact21: {L}{a} -> ¬({K}{a} & ¬{J}{a})

That this kiang is a correctitude or is a ureteritis or both is incorrect.

¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Williams is consolable and it is a waste if the fact that it is not a praetorian is correct. fact2: That this meeting does shrink Verthandi but it is not infallible if this meeting does not belch oldness hold. fact3: The fact that if that somebody does belch oldness and shrinks Verthandi does not hold then this one is not consolable hold. fact4: That this meeting noses taxidermy is true. fact5: Williams maddens Tarsius. fact6: Everything does not fettle. fact7: This kiang is a waste or is a Bourgogne or both if this kiang does not madden Tarsius. fact8: Cat is not a kind of a waste. fact9: If that somebody does not stoop bilharzia hold then either it is a kind of a carboxyl or it is a kind of a spontaneousness or both. fact10: If Williams does not closet glitch then that Williams does belch oldness and it shrinks Verthandi does not hold. fact11: Everything is not bathyal. fact12: That someone is a praetorian and it is a waste does not hold if it is not infallible. fact13: If the fact that somebody is coeliac but it is not a arteritis does not hold then it is not infallible. fact14: Something is not a waste if that this is a praetorian and a waste is not true. fact15: Some person is a correctitude and/or this person is a kind of a ureteritis if this person is not a kind of a waste. fact16: If this meeting does nose taxidermy then Williams does not closet glitch and it does not tenant SW. fact17: The fact that everything is not a waste is true. fact18: Williams is not infallible if this meeting shrinks Verthandi but that thing is not infallible. fact19: If Williams is not a waste and not consolable that sandwichman is a bunkum. fact20: If this quinone is not a Woolworth then either this quinone domesticate enigma or it is a kind of a praetorian or both. fact21: The fact that that Williams is coeliac but the one is not a arteritis does not hold hold if Williams does madden Tarsius. ; $hypothesis$ = That this kiang is a correctitude or is a ureteritis or both is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> int1: This kiang is a kind of a correctitude and/or she/he is a kind of a ureteritis if this kiang is not a kind of a waste.; fact17 -> int2: This kiang is not a waste.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Taoist does encourage Worcester and is a sanctitude.

({B}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: the aestivation strengthens Puck. fact2: If some man does not strengthen aestivation the fact that it encourages Worcester and is a kind of a sanctitude is wrong. fact3: If someone mobilises then she is not genetic. fact4: That Puck mobilises and it is a nu if the fact that this lapel is not binucleate hold. fact5: If that Puck is both not a diploidy and not a sanctitude then that Taoist is a telegraphese. fact6: That Puck is not a kind of a primed and this one is not a kind of a telegraphese if that Puck strengthens aestivation. fact7: If somebody pencils edema that he does not torment Barkley and is not unadvised does not hold. fact8: That end pencils edema if that end is a kind of a narrowing. fact9: That end is a narrowing and he/she is a kind of a scotch if that end is non-Handelian. fact10: If that something is not antiapartheid but it is netting is false then it is not zymotic. fact11: The fact that something is a diploidy and this thing is noninheritable is wrong if this thing is not zymotic. fact12: The fact that that Taoist is a kind of a diploidy that is a kind of a sanctitude hold. fact13: If that Puck is not genetic then the fact that that Taoist is not antiapartheid but it is netting is incorrect. fact14: This lapel is not binucleate if that that end does not torment Barkley and is not unadvised does not hold. fact15: If that Puck is not a kind of a primed and is not a kind of a telegraphese then that Taoist encourages Worcester. fact16: The locomotive encourages Worcester. fact17: If the fact that something is a diploidy and it is noninheritable is wrong then it does not strengthen aestivation. fact18: The Blackfriar is a telegraphese. fact19: That Puck strengthens aestivation. fact20: That Puck does not encourage Worcester if it wears xanthelasma.

fact1: {AC}{aa} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & {C}x) fact3: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}x fact4: ¬{L}{c} -> ({J}{a} & {K}{a}) fact5: (¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {AB}{b} fact6: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact7: (x): {O}x -> ¬(¬{M}x & ¬{N}x) fact8: {P}{d} -> {O}{d} fact9: ¬{R}{d} -> ({P}{d} & {Q}{d}) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact11: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) fact12: ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) fact13: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & {H}{b}) fact14: ¬(¬{M}{d} & ¬{N}{d}) -> ¬{L}{c} fact15: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact16: {B}{fn} fact17: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x fact18: {AB}{fu} fact19: {A}{a} fact20: {IA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a}

The fact that that Taoist does encourage Worcester and is a kind of a sanctitude is incorrect.

¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: the aestivation strengthens Puck. fact2: If some man does not strengthen aestivation the fact that it encourages Worcester and is a kind of a sanctitude is wrong. fact3: If someone mobilises then she is not genetic. fact4: That Puck mobilises and it is a nu if the fact that this lapel is not binucleate hold. fact5: If that Puck is both not a diploidy and not a sanctitude then that Taoist is a telegraphese. fact6: That Puck is not a kind of a primed and this one is not a kind of a telegraphese if that Puck strengthens aestivation. fact7: If somebody pencils edema that he does not torment Barkley and is not unadvised does not hold. fact8: That end pencils edema if that end is a kind of a narrowing. fact9: That end is a narrowing and he/she is a kind of a scotch if that end is non-Handelian. fact10: If that something is not antiapartheid but it is netting is false then it is not zymotic. fact11: The fact that something is a diploidy and this thing is noninheritable is wrong if this thing is not zymotic. fact12: The fact that that Taoist is a kind of a diploidy that is a kind of a sanctitude hold. fact13: If that Puck is not genetic then the fact that that Taoist is not antiapartheid but it is netting is incorrect. fact14: This lapel is not binucleate if that that end does not torment Barkley and is not unadvised does not hold. fact15: If that Puck is not a kind of a primed and is not a kind of a telegraphese then that Taoist encourages Worcester. fact16: The locomotive encourages Worcester. fact17: If the fact that something is a diploidy and it is noninheritable is wrong then it does not strengthen aestivation. fact18: The Blackfriar is a telegraphese. fact19: That Puck strengthens aestivation. fact20: That Puck does not encourage Worcester if it wears xanthelasma. ; $hypothesis$ = That Taoist does encourage Worcester and is a sanctitude. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact19 -> int1: That Puck is not a primed and it is not a telegraphese.; int1 & fact15 -> int2: That Taoist encourages Worcester.; fact12 -> int3: That Taoist is a kind of a sanctitude.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that undistinguishableness happens.

{A}

fact1: That this immunotherapeuticness occurs and that squandering tabes happens results in that that colorimetricalness does not occurs. fact2: The fact that that squandering tabes and this ricocheting occurs if this wearying Nagasaki does not occurs is correct. fact3: That this immunotherapeuticness happens and the basinalness happens is triggered by this non-Spanishness. fact4: The Hollywoodness is caused by that this motion but notthat undistinguishableness occurs. fact5: This conveying Qaeda does not occurs and this motion does not happens. fact6: If that furcating does not occurs that that scaleneness and this Ismailiness occurs is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that that alchemicalness occurs and/or this indoorness happens is false then this conveying Qaeda does not happens. fact8: This Spanishness does not occurs and the menacing Cytisus does not occurs. fact9: That this conveying Qaeda occurs results in that this motion and the distinguishableness happens. fact10: This wearying Nagasaki does not occurs if the fact that both that scaleneness and this Ismailiness happens is incorrect. fact11: This conveying Qaeda does not happens. fact12: That that alchemicalness or this indoorness or both happens is incorrect if that colorimetricalness does not happens. fact13: This motion happens if that undistinguishableness happens.

fact1: ({H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} fact2: ¬{K} -> ({G} & {J}) fact3: ¬{L} -> ({H} & {I}) fact4: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> {IF} fact5: (¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact6: ¬{P} -> ¬({O} & {N}) fact7: ¬({E} v {D}) -> ¬{C} fact8: (¬{L} & ¬{M}) fact9: {C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) fact10: ¬({O} & {N}) -> ¬{K} fact11: ¬{C} fact12: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} v {D}) fact13: {A} -> {B}

Let's assume that that undistinguishableness happens.

{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this immunotherapeuticness occurs and that squandering tabes happens results in that that colorimetricalness does not occurs. fact2: The fact that that squandering tabes and this ricocheting occurs if this wearying Nagasaki does not occurs is correct. fact3: That this immunotherapeuticness happens and the basinalness happens is triggered by this non-Spanishness. fact4: The Hollywoodness is caused by that this motion but notthat undistinguishableness occurs. fact5: This conveying Qaeda does not occurs and this motion does not happens. fact6: If that furcating does not occurs that that scaleneness and this Ismailiness occurs is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that that alchemicalness occurs and/or this indoorness happens is false then this conveying Qaeda does not happens. fact8: This Spanishness does not occurs and the menacing Cytisus does not occurs. fact9: That this conveying Qaeda occurs results in that this motion and the distinguishableness happens. fact10: This wearying Nagasaki does not occurs if the fact that both that scaleneness and this Ismailiness happens is incorrect. fact11: This conveying Qaeda does not happens. fact12: That that alchemicalness or this indoorness or both happens is incorrect if that colorimetricalness does not happens. fact13: This motion happens if that undistinguishableness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that undistinguishableness happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that undistinguishableness happens.; fact13 & assump1 -> int1: This motion occurs.; fact5 -> int2: This motion does not happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that both that dip and this remoteness happens is true does not hold.

¬({AA} & {AB})

fact1: This anaphrodisiacness does not occurs. fact2: That dip and this remoteness occurs if this anaphrodisiacness does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{A} fact2: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This anaphrodisiacness does not occurs. fact2: That dip and this remoteness occurs if this anaphrodisiacness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that both that dip and this remoteness happens is true does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that cymbal is urethral but it is not a Paraclete does not hold.

¬({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b})

fact1: If something is not non-allochthonous then that thing is not a palaeobiology and not urethral. fact2: That cymbal is not a palaeobiology if this redbelly is a palaeobiology. fact3: If someone is not a palaeobiology the fact that it is dehiscent and allochthonous is false. fact4: That something is not a Paraclete and is not dehiscent does not hold if it is not a kind of a palaeobiology. fact5: This redbelly is antemortem but that thing is not political if that cymbal is dehiscent. fact6: That that cymbal is dehiscent hold. fact7: If somebody is not dehiscent then the fact that she is urethral and she is not a Paraclete does not hold. fact8: That cymbal is both urethral and not a Paraclete if this redbelly is a Paraclete. fact9: This redbelly is a kind of dehiscent person that is a Paraclete. fact10: Someone is dehiscent if that it is not a Paraclete and is not dehiscent is incorrect. fact11: If that cymbal is a Paraclete this redbelly is urethral.

fact1: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact2: {C}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {E}x) fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact5: {A}{b} -> ({JD}{a} & ¬{HE}{a}) fact6: {A}{b} fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) fact8: {B}{a} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x fact11: {B}{b} -> {D}{a}

The fact that that cymbal is urethral but it is not a Paraclete does not hold.

¬({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not non-allochthonous then that thing is not a palaeobiology and not urethral. fact2: That cymbal is not a palaeobiology if this redbelly is a palaeobiology. fact3: If someone is not a palaeobiology the fact that it is dehiscent and allochthonous is false. fact4: That something is not a Paraclete and is not dehiscent does not hold if it is not a kind of a palaeobiology. fact5: This redbelly is antemortem but that thing is not political if that cymbal is dehiscent. fact6: That that cymbal is dehiscent hold. fact7: If somebody is not dehiscent then the fact that she is urethral and she is not a Paraclete does not hold. fact8: That cymbal is both urethral and not a Paraclete if this redbelly is a Paraclete. fact9: This redbelly is a kind of dehiscent person that is a Paraclete. fact10: Someone is dehiscent if that it is not a Paraclete and is not dehiscent is incorrect. fact11: If that cymbal is a Paraclete this redbelly is urethral. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that cymbal is urethral but it is not a Paraclete does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: This redbelly is a Paraclete.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that this mandrel is not a Pholis and that is not a Kobenhavn is right does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: Some man that does not signal dishabille is a kind of a papule that micturates. fact2: This mandrel does not concur if that stiff is not a Kobenhavn. fact3: The fact that something is not a kind of a Kobenhavn and it does not concur does not hold if it micturates. fact4: If that someone is not corrigible and is cenobitic is not right that person does not signal dishabille. fact5: That stiff is not a kind of a Kobenhavn if that this mandrel is not a Kobenhavn and does not concur does not hold. fact6: This mandrel does not concur. fact7: If some person goffers Brest that he/she is non-corrigible person that is cenobitic is not true. fact8: The fashionmonger is not a Kobenhavn. fact9: That stiff does not concur. fact10: This mandrel is not a Kobenhavn. fact11: That stiff is not a Kobenhavn. fact12: If something concurs the fact that it is not a Pholis and is not a Kobenhavn does not hold. fact13: If that stiff does not concur this mandrel is not a Kobenhavn.

fact1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {B}x) fact2: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact3: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact5: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{AB}{a} fact6: ¬{A}{b} fact7: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) fact8: ¬{AB}{fi} fact9: ¬{A}{a} fact10: ¬{AB}{b} fact11: ¬{AB}{a} fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact13: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b}

That stiff is not a Kobenhavn.

¬{AB}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man that does not signal dishabille is a kind of a papule that micturates. fact2: This mandrel does not concur if that stiff is not a Kobenhavn. fact3: The fact that something is not a kind of a Kobenhavn and it does not concur does not hold if it micturates. fact4: If that someone is not corrigible and is cenobitic is not right that person does not signal dishabille. fact5: That stiff is not a kind of a Kobenhavn if that this mandrel is not a Kobenhavn and does not concur does not hold. fact6: This mandrel does not concur. fact7: If some person goffers Brest that he/she is non-corrigible person that is cenobitic is not true. fact8: The fashionmonger is not a Kobenhavn. fact9: That stiff does not concur. fact10: This mandrel is not a Kobenhavn. fact11: That stiff is not a Kobenhavn. fact12: If something concurs the fact that it is not a Pholis and is not a Kobenhavn does not hold. fact13: If that stiff does not concur this mandrel is not a Kobenhavn. ; $hypothesis$ = That that this mandrel is not a Pholis and that is not a Kobenhavn is right does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This symphonist is a Mysore.

{B}{a}

fact1: This symphonist is not electrocardiographic and is exegetic. fact2: If this symphonist grips untruthfulness and it is a kind of a Rhineland then the fact that Young is not tough hold. fact3: If this therapist is not a kind of a Zoomastigina then that it is aesthetic and/or it does not duplicate irresolution is incorrect. fact4: If that that groundfish is not a Coulomb and not a disciplined is false this symphonist grips untruthfulness. fact5: Something is not exegetic and settles Neva if the fact that that is a scalability is right. fact6: That conchologist is not a Christiania if that this therapist is not clerical and not a Christiania is not correct. fact7: That that groundfish is not a kind of a Coulomb and that is not a disciplined does not hold if the humanity is not a kind of a cedi. fact8: This symphonist is a Rhineland if this astroglia is not eponymic and is hypophyseal. fact9: Some man that is not tough is a scalability and a Mysore. fact10: If this symphonist is not electrocardiographic but the thing is exegetic the thing is not a Mysore. fact11: That the humanity is not a cedi is correct. fact12: If that conchologist is not a Christiania this astroglia is not eponymic and not non-hypophyseal. fact13: If this therapist is photosynthetic then that this therapist is both non-clerical and not a Christiania is wrong. fact14: If that this therapist either is aesthetic or does not duplicate irresolution or both is not right then this therapist is photosynthetic.

fact1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ag} fact3: ¬{P}{e} -> ¬({O}{e} v ¬{N}{e}) fact4: ¬(¬{I}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) -> {D}{a} fact5: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AB}x & {IU}x) fact6: ¬(¬{K}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) -> ¬{H}{c} fact7: ¬{L}{f} -> ¬(¬{I}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) fact8: (¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> {E}{a} fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact10: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact11: ¬{L}{f} fact12: ¬{H}{c} -> (¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) fact13: {M}{e} -> ¬(¬{K}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) fact14: ¬({O}{e} v ¬{N}{e}) -> {M}{e}

Young is not exegetic but this one settles Neva.

(¬{AB}{ag} & {IU}{ag})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This symphonist is not electrocardiographic and is exegetic. fact2: If this symphonist grips untruthfulness and it is a kind of a Rhineland then the fact that Young is not tough hold. fact3: If this therapist is not a kind of a Zoomastigina then that it is aesthetic and/or it does not duplicate irresolution is incorrect. fact4: If that that groundfish is not a Coulomb and not a disciplined is false this symphonist grips untruthfulness. fact5: Something is not exegetic and settles Neva if the fact that that is a scalability is right. fact6: That conchologist is not a Christiania if that this therapist is not clerical and not a Christiania is not correct. fact7: That that groundfish is not a kind of a Coulomb and that is not a disciplined does not hold if the humanity is not a kind of a cedi. fact8: This symphonist is a Rhineland if this astroglia is not eponymic and is hypophyseal. fact9: Some man that is not tough is a scalability and a Mysore. fact10: If this symphonist is not electrocardiographic but the thing is exegetic the thing is not a Mysore. fact11: That the humanity is not a cedi is correct. fact12: If that conchologist is not a Christiania this astroglia is not eponymic and not non-hypophyseal. fact13: If this therapist is photosynthetic then that this therapist is both non-clerical and not a Christiania is wrong. fact14: If that this therapist either is aesthetic or does not duplicate irresolution or both is not right then this therapist is photosynthetic. ; $hypothesis$ = This symphonist is a Mysore. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That hayrack does not intermit demo.

¬{D}{c}

fact1: Someone that is a kind of a wigged is non-prolix one that does not intermit demo. fact2: If this sowbelly is not prolix then this hardinggrass is uncivil and is a Liberian. fact3: If the fact that this hardinggrass is not prolix is correct then that hayrack does not intermit demo. fact4: This sowbelly is a Liberian. fact5: This hardinggrass is not prolix if this sowbelly is a Liberian and/or is uncivil.

fact1: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact2: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact3: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{D}{c} fact4: {A}{a} fact5: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b}

That this hardinggrass is uncivil hold.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone that is a kind of a wigged is non-prolix one that does not intermit demo. fact2: If this sowbelly is not prolix then this hardinggrass is uncivil and is a Liberian. fact3: If the fact that this hardinggrass is not prolix is correct then that hayrack does not intermit demo. fact4: This sowbelly is a Liberian. fact5: This hardinggrass is not prolix if this sowbelly is a Liberian and/or is uncivil. ; $hypothesis$ = That hayrack does not intermit demo. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This sowbelly is a Liberian or that one is uncivil or both.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This hardinggrass is not prolix.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Panadol is a iridocyclitis.

{D}{c}

fact1: This oxcart is apocrine and/or it is a pneumatics. fact2: This oxcart is a iridocyclitis and/or is a pneumatics. fact3: This Panadol is a pneumatics if that this oxcart does barrel nonoccurrence hold. fact4: If this oxcart is a pneumatics then this Panadol barrels nonoccurrence. fact5: That some person is not caudated but this one is a Manichee is false if this one is an applause. fact6: The gastronome is a iridocyclitis and the thing is apocrine if this oxcart is not a kind of a pneumatics. fact7: The fact that this screw is an applause is right if this Panadol is unsilenced. fact8: Something barrels nonoccurrence and is not a pneumatics if this is not a Alliaceae. fact9: This oxcart is a iridocyclitis if this Panadol is a kind of a pneumatics. fact10: This oxcart barrels nonoccurrence and/or it is apocrine. fact11: Somebody is not a kind of a iridocyclitis if this person is a pneumatics and apocrine. fact12: If the fact that this irredenta is not a trig and circumambulates Disneyland does not hold this gayfeather does not circumambulates Disneyland. fact13: That something is a iridocyclitis is correct if that thing barrels nonoccurrence. fact14: If the fact that this gayfeather does not circumambulate Disneyland hold then this Panadol does not yoke Xiphosura. fact15: If that this screw is not caudated but it is a Manichee is wrong then this oxcart is not a Alliaceae. fact16: This Panadol barrels nonoccurrence if it is apocrine. fact17: Something is unsilenced if this thing does not yoke Xiphosura. fact18: If this irredenta is not non-parasympathomimetic the fact that it is not a kind of a trig and it circumambulates Disneyland is wrong.

fact1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact2: ({D}{a} v {B}{a}) fact3: {C}{a} -> {B}{c} fact4: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact5: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) fact6: ¬{B}{a} -> ({D}{f} & {A}{f}) fact7: {I}{c} -> {H}{b} fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact9: {B}{c} -> {D}{a} fact10: ({C}{a} v {A}{a}) fact11: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{D}x fact12: ¬(¬{M}{e} & {K}{e}) -> ¬{K}{d} fact13: (x): {C}x -> {D}x fact14: ¬{K}{d} -> ¬{J}{c} fact15: ¬(¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact16: {A}{c} -> {C}{c} fact17: (x): ¬{J}x -> {I}x fact18: {L}{e} -> ¬(¬{M}{e} & {K}{e})

This Panadol is not a iridocyclitis.

¬{D}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This oxcart is apocrine and/or it is a pneumatics. fact2: This oxcart is a iridocyclitis and/or is a pneumatics. fact3: This Panadol is a pneumatics if that this oxcart does barrel nonoccurrence hold. fact4: If this oxcart is a pneumatics then this Panadol barrels nonoccurrence. fact5: That some person is not caudated but this one is a Manichee is false if this one is an applause. fact6: The gastronome is a iridocyclitis and the thing is apocrine if this oxcart is not a kind of a pneumatics. fact7: The fact that this screw is an applause is right if this Panadol is unsilenced. fact8: Something barrels nonoccurrence and is not a pneumatics if this is not a Alliaceae. fact9: This oxcart is a iridocyclitis if this Panadol is a kind of a pneumatics. fact10: This oxcart barrels nonoccurrence and/or it is apocrine. fact11: Somebody is not a kind of a iridocyclitis if this person is a pneumatics and apocrine. fact12: If the fact that this irredenta is not a trig and circumambulates Disneyland does not hold this gayfeather does not circumambulates Disneyland. fact13: That something is a iridocyclitis is correct if that thing barrels nonoccurrence. fact14: If the fact that this gayfeather does not circumambulate Disneyland hold then this Panadol does not yoke Xiphosura. fact15: If that this screw is not caudated but it is a Manichee is wrong then this oxcart is not a Alliaceae. fact16: This Panadol barrels nonoccurrence if it is apocrine. fact17: Something is unsilenced if this thing does not yoke Xiphosura. fact18: If this irredenta is not non-parasympathomimetic the fact that it is not a kind of a trig and it circumambulates Disneyland is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This Panadol is a iridocyclitis. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This Genoese is not a Turbatrix.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: This Genoese does not tile XXIV and it is not a starred. fact2: This Genoese does not tile XXIV. fact3: Something does not housebreak aesthesis if that that thing is not a kind of a Cambodian and that thing does housebreak aesthesis does not hold. fact4: If that haematocrit is not a Burbank then the fact that this Genoese is not a kind of a Cambodian but it housebreaks aesthesis is incorrect. fact5: If a Mesolithic is not hateful the fact that it transfixes Ashir is correct. fact6: Some person that is a geographics and/or not non-hex is not a kind of a Turbatrix. fact7: If somebody does not housebreak aesthesis that it does not Hull arcanum and it does not typeset wanted is not true. fact8: Something is a Turbatrix if it does not tile XXIV and is not a starred. fact9: This Genoese is a Turbatrix if that tiles XXIV and that is not a starred. fact10: If the fact that something does not Hull arcanum and it does not typeset wanted does not hold then it is hex. fact11: Something that is not nonspecific and does not smack suppleness do notwn Diodontidae. fact12: This casava is a Ophidia and/or is non-spatiotemporal if this casava models friability. fact13: This casava does model friability.

fact1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact2: ¬{AA}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x fact4: ¬{H}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{aa} & {F}{aa}) fact5: (x): ({BO}x & ¬{HO}x) -> {FB}x fact6: (x): ({C}x v {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) fact8: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact9: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact10: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x fact11: (x): (¬{CG}x & ¬{HT}x) -> {IK}x fact12: {K}{b} -> ({J}{b} v ¬{I}{b}) fact13: {K}{b}

This Genoese is not a Turbatrix.

¬{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Genoese does not tile XXIV and it is not a starred. fact2: This Genoese does not tile XXIV. fact3: Something does not housebreak aesthesis if that that thing is not a kind of a Cambodian and that thing does housebreak aesthesis does not hold. fact4: If that haematocrit is not a Burbank then the fact that this Genoese is not a kind of a Cambodian but it housebreaks aesthesis is incorrect. fact5: If a Mesolithic is not hateful the fact that it transfixes Ashir is correct. fact6: Some person that is a geographics and/or not non-hex is not a kind of a Turbatrix. fact7: If somebody does not housebreak aesthesis that it does not Hull arcanum and it does not typeset wanted is not true. fact8: Something is a Turbatrix if it does not tile XXIV and is not a starred. fact9: This Genoese is a Turbatrix if that tiles XXIV and that is not a starred. fact10: If the fact that something does not Hull arcanum and it does not typeset wanted does not hold then it is hex. fact11: Something that is not nonspecific and does not smack suppleness do notwn Diodontidae. fact12: This casava is a Ophidia and/or is non-spatiotemporal if this casava models friability. fact13: This casava does model friability. ; $hypothesis$ = This Genoese is not a Turbatrix. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This Genoese is a Turbatrix if this Genoese does not tile XXIV and it is not a starred.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This entryway does not plasticise porosity.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: Everything waffles rancidness. fact2: The fact that that the electrometer either does not mend fact or does not sailplaning certainty or both is correct does not hold. fact3: If that fink is not a substantialness but she does waffle rancidness this entryway does plasticise porosity. fact4: That fink is not a substantialness if the fact that the fact that the electrometer does not mend fact and/or this thing does not sailplaning certainty is wrong is right.

fact1: (x): {A}x fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{c} fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everything waffles rancidness. fact2: The fact that that the electrometer either does not mend fact or does not sailplaning certainty or both is correct does not hold. fact3: If that fink is not a substantialness but she does waffle rancidness this entryway does plasticise porosity. fact4: That fink is not a substantialness if the fact that the fact that the electrometer does not mend fact and/or this thing does not sailplaning certainty is wrong is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This entryway does not plasticise porosity. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> int1: That fink is not a kind of a substantialness.; fact1 -> int2: That fink waffles rancidness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That fink is not a substantialness and waffles rancidness.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This lifer is not a Old.

¬{AA}{a}

fact1: That this quassia is not a Old is incorrect. fact2: If this lifer is not a hemianopia it is a bushing that is a kind of a Yafo. fact3: If this lifer is not a hemianopia then this lifer is a Old that is a kind of a chiasmus. fact4: The fact that that sherry is sturdy and it is a Old hold. fact5: This lifer is a cash. fact6: If something is maleficent then this thing is a Elagatis. fact7: That that epiglottis is not a hemianopia and it is not virological does not hold if this lifer is a Elagatis. fact8: The cockchafer is a kind of a Coprinus if it does not wreak Bulgaria. fact9: If the womaniser is not a sloughing this is a chickenpox and this prevents Blephilia. fact10: This lifer is not virological. fact11: This lifer is a kind of a Coprinus. fact12: If the waft does not allow Decapterus then it is a hemianopia. fact13: This lifer is not a kind of a hemianopia. fact14: This lifer antagonises candour.

fact1: {AA}{i} fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ({GE}{a} & {CL}{a}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact4: ({AK}{ck} & {AA}{ck}) fact5: {IR}{a} fact6: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact7: {C}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{en} & ¬{B}{en}) fact8: ¬{AS}{af} -> {IN}{af} fact9: ¬{BU}{gs} -> ({FI}{gs} & {F}{gs}) fact10: ¬{B}{a} fact11: {IN}{a} fact12: ¬{FS}{ad} -> {A}{ad} fact13: ¬{A}{a} fact14: {CD}{a}

That epiglottis is a kind of a Old.

{AA}{en}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this quassia is not a Old is incorrect. fact2: If this lifer is not a hemianopia it is a bushing that is a kind of a Yafo. fact3: If this lifer is not a hemianopia then this lifer is a Old that is a kind of a chiasmus. fact4: The fact that that sherry is sturdy and it is a Old hold. fact5: This lifer is a cash. fact6: If something is maleficent then this thing is a Elagatis. fact7: That that epiglottis is not a hemianopia and it is not virological does not hold if this lifer is a Elagatis. fact8: The cockchafer is a kind of a Coprinus if it does not wreak Bulgaria. fact9: If the womaniser is not a sloughing this is a chickenpox and this prevents Blephilia. fact10: This lifer is not virological. fact11: This lifer is a kind of a Coprinus. fact12: If the waft does not allow Decapterus then it is a hemianopia. fact13: This lifer is not a kind of a hemianopia. fact14: This lifer antagonises candour. ; $hypothesis$ = This lifer is not a Old. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact13 -> int1: This lifer is a kind of a Old that is a chiasmus.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That execution is not a Heterotrichales.

¬{A}{b}

fact1: The trifle is haptic but not tsarist. fact2: Something is not a incomprehensibility and is not unleaded if that is non-deciduous. fact3: If that tumulus is a Psithyrus and does not writhe twinned then that strangles Hebrides. fact4: That pruner acquires Fatihah or it is not a Psocidae or both if it is not punitive. fact5: That execution is a hammered. fact6: If that something does not reach hermaphroditism and engages does not hold then it does not engages. fact7: If this picker outfits Verrazzano that execution is a Heterotrichales. fact8: If this picker is raptorial but that is not haptic this picker outfits Verrazzano. fact9: This picker is both raptorial and not haptic. fact10: That pruner is not punitive. fact11: This picker is raptorial. fact12: Something is raptorial thing that is a Heterotrichales if it does not outfit Verrazzano. fact13: If that this picker is not a kind of a Heterotrichales and/or does not outfit Verrazzano is wrong that execution is not a kind of a Heterotrichales. fact14: If this precipitate does not engage that that either this picker is not a Heterotrichales or this does not outfit Verrazzano or both hold does not hold. fact15: If somebody is not a incomprehensibility the fact that she/he does not reach hermaphroditism and she/he engages does not hold.

fact1: ({AB}{gu} & ¬{FN}{gu}) fact2: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{F}x) fact3: ({CJ}{jd} & ¬{DK}{jd}) -> {BA}{jd} fact4: ¬{J}{d} -> ({I}{d} v ¬{H}{d}) fact5: {JK}{b} fact6: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact7: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact8: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact9: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact10: ¬{J}{d} fact11: {AA}{a} fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({AA}x & {A}x) fact13: ¬(¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact14: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x)

That execution is not a Heterotrichales.

¬{A}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The trifle is haptic but not tsarist. fact2: Something is not a incomprehensibility and is not unleaded if that is non-deciduous. fact3: If that tumulus is a Psithyrus and does not writhe twinned then that strangles Hebrides. fact4: That pruner acquires Fatihah or it is not a Psocidae or both if it is not punitive. fact5: That execution is a hammered. fact6: If that something does not reach hermaphroditism and engages does not hold then it does not engages. fact7: If this picker outfits Verrazzano that execution is a Heterotrichales. fact8: If this picker is raptorial but that is not haptic this picker outfits Verrazzano. fact9: This picker is both raptorial and not haptic. fact10: That pruner is not punitive. fact11: This picker is raptorial. fact12: Something is raptorial thing that is a Heterotrichales if it does not outfit Verrazzano. fact13: If that this picker is not a kind of a Heterotrichales and/or does not outfit Verrazzano is wrong that execution is not a kind of a Heterotrichales. fact14: If this precipitate does not engage that that either this picker is not a Heterotrichales or this does not outfit Verrazzano or both hold does not hold. fact15: If somebody is not a incomprehensibility the fact that she/he does not reach hermaphroditism and she/he engages does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That execution is not a Heterotrichales. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact9 -> int1: This picker does outfit Verrazzano.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That actinomycete is not a lubricity.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: If somebody is not satanic he is optional. fact2: That actinomycete does empty. fact3: The generator is not optional but a wrongfulness. fact4: The toastrack is not optional. fact5: That actinomycete is a Graminales. fact6: That some man is a lubricity hold if he/she is not satanic. fact7: This quicksand is not a Graminales but this one is satanic. fact8: That actinomycete wows Yibit. fact9: That actinomycete is optional. fact10: Shelly is optional. fact11: That actinomycete does not enlist pep. fact12: The fact that that actinomycete is not a lubricity hold if that Emmenthal is optional and is not a lubricity. fact13: This Brazilian is satanic. fact14: That actinomycete is not a Finland but it is a kind of a Stokowski. fact15: Something is not satanic if it is not a bickering. fact16: If some man is not optional then it is a lubricity. fact17: Something is Kantian if the thing is not a kind of a reproval. fact18: If something is not a kind of a okeh then that thing is a kind of a lubricity.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x fact2: {CQ}{a} fact3: (¬{B}{br} & {DO}{br}) fact4: ¬{B}{eg} fact5: {CD}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> {C}x fact7: (¬{CD}{jg} & {A}{jg}) fact8: {AQ}{a} fact9: {B}{a} fact10: {B}{ji} fact11: ¬{EH}{a} fact12: ({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact13: {A}{hi} fact14: (¬{HQ}{a} & {EM}{a}) fact15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x fact16: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact17: (x): ¬{R}x -> {DT}x fact18: (x): ¬{GR}x -> {C}x

If the plagiarizer is not a kind of a okeh it is a lubricity.

¬{GR}{gf} -> {C}{gf}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody is not satanic he is optional. fact2: That actinomycete does empty. fact3: The generator is not optional but a wrongfulness. fact4: The toastrack is not optional. fact5: That actinomycete is a Graminales. fact6: That some man is a lubricity hold if he/she is not satanic. fact7: This quicksand is not a Graminales but this one is satanic. fact8: That actinomycete wows Yibit. fact9: That actinomycete is optional. fact10: Shelly is optional. fact11: That actinomycete does not enlist pep. fact12: The fact that that actinomycete is not a lubricity hold if that Emmenthal is optional and is not a lubricity. fact13: This Brazilian is satanic. fact14: That actinomycete is not a Finland but it is a kind of a Stokowski. fact15: Something is not satanic if it is not a bickering. fact16: If some man is not optional then it is a lubricity. fact17: Something is Kantian if the thing is not a kind of a reproval. fact18: If something is not a kind of a okeh then that thing is a kind of a lubricity. ; $hypothesis$ = That actinomycete is not a lubricity. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This marliness does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If that both this marliness and the non-heliacness happens is wrong then this heliacness occurs. fact2: This marliness happens if that the fact that notthis porphyriticness but this crying occurs is right is incorrect. fact3: If that seism does not happens then this marliness does not occurs and this corroding does not occurs. fact4: If this adrenarche does not occurs then this corroding and that seism occurs. fact5: If this corroding happens then that this marliness happens and this heliacness does not occurs is false. fact6: That both the jehad and the swash occurs does not hold. fact7: That this porphyriticness does not happens and this crying happens does not hold.

fact1: ¬({B} & ¬{GG}) -> {GG} fact2: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact3: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact4: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {C}) fact5: {A} -> ¬({B} & ¬{GG}) fact6: ¬({GJ} & {CD}) fact7: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

This marliness does not occurs.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that both this marliness and the non-heliacness happens is wrong then this heliacness occurs. fact2: This marliness happens if that the fact that notthis porphyriticness but this crying occurs is right is incorrect. fact3: If that seism does not happens then this marliness does not occurs and this corroding does not occurs. fact4: If this adrenarche does not occurs then this corroding and that seism occurs. fact5: If this corroding happens then that this marliness happens and this heliacness does not occurs is false. fact6: That both the jehad and the swash occurs does not hold. fact7: That this porphyriticness does not happens and this crying happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This marliness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this manioca is nectariferous is correct.

{B}{b}

fact1: This manioca is both pass and a oppositeness if this manioca is not a exotism. fact2: This Glengarry is a kind of a grazed if it does discontinue hydatidosis. fact3: The fact that this RN is a Scutellaria that does not heckle charmed is false. fact4: This wincey is non-Prakritic. fact5: This RN is Prakritic. fact6: That shiv is not a Ascaphus or is a exotism or both if this Glengarry is a grazed. fact7: If the fact that some person is not nectariferous and not upland is not right this one is not Prakritic. fact8: The fact that this RN is not a Scutellaria and heckles charmed is false. fact9: If some person that conjugates Delius is not fiscal then he/she adheres. fact10: This manioca is not a exotism if that shiv is not a Ascaphus and/or he/she is a exotism. fact11: This Glengarry discontinues hydatidosis if it adheres. fact12: If this RN is Prakritic then the fact that it is a kind of a Scutellaria that does not heckle charmed does not hold. fact13: That that accompaniment heckles charmed hold. fact14: This RN does not abbreviate annunciation. fact15: This RN is enteral. fact16: This Glengarry does conjugate Delius. fact17: This Glengarry is not fiscal. fact18: If this RN is a Scutellaria then that this one does not heckle charmed and this one is not nectariferous is wrong. fact19: If someone is not Prakritic the fact that the person is not a Scutellaria and the person is not a coextension is wrong. fact20: This manioca is not indusial. fact21: If that this RN is not a Scutellaria and does not heckle charmed does not hold then this manioca is not nectariferous. fact22: If this RN is Prakritic the fact that the thing is not a Scutellaria and does not heckle charmed is wrong. fact23: The fact that this RN is not a Scutellaria and heckles charmed does not hold if this one is Prakritic.

fact1: ¬{F}{b} -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact2: {I}{d} -> {H}{d} fact3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact4: ¬{A}{i} fact5: {A}{a} fact6: {H}{d} -> (¬{G}{c} v {F}{c}) fact7: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact9: (x): ({L}x & ¬{K}x) -> {J}x fact10: (¬{G}{c} v {F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact11: {J}{d} -> {I}{d} fact12: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact13: {AB}{ek} fact14: ¬{DK}{a} fact15: {FI}{a} fact16: {L}{d} fact17: ¬{K}{d} fact18: {AA}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact19: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{GU}x) fact20: ¬{M}{b} fact21: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact22: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact23: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

That this RN is not a Scutellaria and not a coextension is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{GU}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This manioca is both pass and a oppositeness if this manioca is not a exotism. fact2: This Glengarry is a kind of a grazed if it does discontinue hydatidosis. fact3: The fact that this RN is a Scutellaria that does not heckle charmed is false. fact4: This wincey is non-Prakritic. fact5: This RN is Prakritic. fact6: That shiv is not a Ascaphus or is a exotism or both if this Glengarry is a grazed. fact7: If the fact that some person is not nectariferous and not upland is not right this one is not Prakritic. fact8: The fact that this RN is not a Scutellaria and heckles charmed is false. fact9: If some person that conjugates Delius is not fiscal then he/she adheres. fact10: This manioca is not a exotism if that shiv is not a Ascaphus and/or he/she is a exotism. fact11: This Glengarry discontinues hydatidosis if it adheres. fact12: If this RN is Prakritic then the fact that it is a kind of a Scutellaria that does not heckle charmed does not hold. fact13: That that accompaniment heckles charmed hold. fact14: This RN does not abbreviate annunciation. fact15: This RN is enteral. fact16: This Glengarry does conjugate Delius. fact17: This Glengarry is not fiscal. fact18: If this RN is a Scutellaria then that this one does not heckle charmed and this one is not nectariferous is wrong. fact19: If someone is not Prakritic the fact that the person is not a Scutellaria and the person is not a coextension is wrong. fact20: This manioca is not indusial. fact21: If that this RN is not a Scutellaria and does not heckle charmed does not hold then this manioca is not nectariferous. fact22: If this RN is Prakritic the fact that the thing is not a Scutellaria and does not heckle charmed is wrong. fact23: The fact that this RN is not a Scutellaria and heckles charmed does not hold if this one is Prakritic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this manioca is nectariferous is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact22 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that this RN is not a Scutellaria and does not heckle charmed is incorrect.; int1 & fact21 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That teaching mermaid occurs.

{C}

fact1: If this ranging malady does not occurs that both that civilianness and that teaching mermaid occurs is incorrect. fact2: This ranging malady happens and that civilianness does not occurs. fact3: That the swiping happens is correct if the fact that this ranging malady does not occurs hold. fact4: That civilianness does not happens.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact2: ({A} & ¬{B}) fact3: ¬{A} -> {CO} fact4: ¬{B}

That that teaching mermaid does not happens hold.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this ranging malady does not occurs that both that civilianness and that teaching mermaid occurs is incorrect. fact2: This ranging malady happens and that civilianness does not occurs. fact3: That the swiping happens is correct if the fact that this ranging malady does not occurs hold. fact4: That civilianness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That teaching mermaid occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That existentness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That that existentness does not occurs is caused by this nocking visibleness. fact2: That existentness does not occurs if this blackening and/or this nocking visibleness happens. fact3: This shampoo occurs. fact4: This blackening happens and this shampoo occurs.

fact1: {C} -> ¬{D} fact2: ({A} v {C}) -> ¬{D} fact3: {B} fact4: ({A} & {B})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That that existentness does not occurs is caused by this nocking visibleness. fact2: That existentness does not occurs if this blackening and/or this nocking visibleness happens. fact3: This shampoo occurs. fact4: This blackening happens and this shampoo occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That existentness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This blackening occurs.; int1 -> int2: This blackening and/or this nocking visibleness happens.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that that patroness is a benignancy and/or it does not shape is true is wrong.

¬({B}{c} v ¬{C}{c})

fact1: The fact that the lipide does illustrate biosafety and/or it is not untoughened is incorrect. fact2: That that patroness is a benignancy or the person does not shape or both does not hold if that Zimmer is a benignancy. fact3: That breast is a uricaciduria. fact4: If that breast is a uricaciduria that Zimmer is a benignancy.

fact1: ¬({AF}{bm} v ¬{FT}{bm}) fact2: {B}{b} -> ¬({B}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the lipide does illustrate biosafety and/or it is not untoughened is incorrect. fact2: That that patroness is a benignancy or the person does not shape or both does not hold if that Zimmer is a benignancy. fact3: That breast is a uricaciduria. fact4: If that breast is a uricaciduria that Zimmer is a benignancy. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that that patroness is a benignancy and/or it does not shape is true is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 -> int1: That Zimmer is a benignancy.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That sensitisation is a kind of a XXVI.

{D}{b}

fact1: That lining is a Mus if this cypher dims Cygnus. fact2: The fact that the fact that something is not a kind of a XXVI and undercoats Platanistidae is not false is not right if it does not dim Cygnus. fact3: That lining dims Cygnus if this cypher is a Mus. fact4: If some person administers Lozier that this person is not a horsemanship and/or this person is not hydraulic does not hold. fact5: If there is someone such that the fact that the one is not a historicalness and the one is not a parachuting is correct this mulberry is not a historicalness. fact6: If this cypher undercoats Platanistidae then that lining is a kind of a Mus. fact7: That lining does leer tact if this mulberry is not pyknotic. fact8: If that the fact that Kareem either is not a horsemanship or is non-hydraulic or both hold is false then it does verse costumed. fact9: That lining is a kind of a XXVI. fact10: If the fact that this cypher is not a XXVI but it undercoats Platanistidae does not hold then that sensitisation is not a XXVI. fact11: If that lining is a kind of a Mus that sensitisation is a XXVI. fact12: Something that is not a historicalness is not a Mus and/or is not pyknotic. fact13: Franco is a Mus. fact14: If some person verses costumed then it is not a historicalness and it is not a kind of a parachuting. fact15: This cypher dims Cygnus and/or it undercoats Platanistidae. fact16: This cypher pans uncreativeness. fact17: That lining does leer tact if this mulberry is not a Mus. fact18: Kareem administers Lozier and it is prophetical if that it is not ferned is not wrong. fact19: If that sensitisation undercoats Platanistidae then the fact that this cypher is a XXVI hold. fact20: Kareem is non-ferned.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) fact3: {C}{a} -> {A}{c} fact4: (x): {L}x -> ¬(¬{K}x v ¬{J}x) fact5: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{G}{d} fact6: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact7: ¬{F}{d} -> {E}{c} fact8: ¬(¬{K}{e} v ¬{J}{e}) -> {I}{e} fact9: {D}{c} fact10: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact11: {C}{c} -> {D}{b} fact12: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{F}x) fact13: {C}{hh} fact14: (x): {I}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) fact15: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact16: {T}{a} fact17: ¬{C}{d} -> {E}{c} fact18: ¬{N}{e} -> ({L}{e} & {M}{e}) fact19: {B}{b} -> {D}{a} fact20: ¬{N}{e}

That sensitisation is not a XXVI.

¬{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lining is a Mus if this cypher dims Cygnus. fact2: The fact that the fact that something is not a kind of a XXVI and undercoats Platanistidae is not false is not right if it does not dim Cygnus. fact3: That lining dims Cygnus if this cypher is a Mus. fact4: If some person administers Lozier that this person is not a horsemanship and/or this person is not hydraulic does not hold. fact5: If there is someone such that the fact that the one is not a historicalness and the one is not a parachuting is correct this mulberry is not a historicalness. fact6: If this cypher undercoats Platanistidae then that lining is a kind of a Mus. fact7: That lining does leer tact if this mulberry is not pyknotic. fact8: If that the fact that Kareem either is not a horsemanship or is non-hydraulic or both hold is false then it does verse costumed. fact9: That lining is a kind of a XXVI. fact10: If the fact that this cypher is not a XXVI but it undercoats Platanistidae does not hold then that sensitisation is not a XXVI. fact11: If that lining is a kind of a Mus that sensitisation is a XXVI. fact12: Something that is not a historicalness is not a Mus and/or is not pyknotic. fact13: Franco is a Mus. fact14: If some person verses costumed then it is not a historicalness and it is not a kind of a parachuting. fact15: This cypher dims Cygnus and/or it undercoats Platanistidae. fact16: This cypher pans uncreativeness. fact17: That lining does leer tact if this mulberry is not a Mus. fact18: Kareem administers Lozier and it is prophetical if that it is not ferned is not wrong. fact19: If that sensitisation undercoats Platanistidae then the fact that this cypher is a XXVI hold. fact20: Kareem is non-ferned. ; $hypothesis$ = That sensitisation is a kind of a XXVI. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact1 & fact6 -> int1: That lining is a Mus.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

If that that syneresis does not quit is true the fact that that consigner is noncombustible hold.

¬{A}{a} -> {C}{b}

fact1: If that syneresis does not quit then it is a Cytisus. fact2: That consigner is noncombustible if the fact that that syneresis quits hold. fact3: If that syneresis quits that syneresis is a Cytisus. fact4: The fact that that consigner is noncombustible hold if that syneresis is a kind of a Cytisus.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} fact3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: {B}{a} -> {C}{b}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that syneresis does not quit then it is a Cytisus. fact2: That consigner is noncombustible if the fact that that syneresis quits hold. fact3: If that syneresis quits that syneresis is a Cytisus. fact4: The fact that that consigner is noncombustible hold if that syneresis is a kind of a Cytisus. ; $hypothesis$ = If that that syneresis does not quit is true the fact that that consigner is noncombustible hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that syneresis does not quit.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: That syneresis is a Cytisus.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That consigner is noncombustible.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Edronax fossilizes gourmandism.

{C}{d}

fact1: Something is not impressionable and that thing is not a callousness if that thing does not fossilize gourmandism. fact2: If that crampbark is a kind of unimpressionable one that is a callousness then this Edronax does not fossilize gourmandism. fact3: If that symbolizer is not allomerous and not monoploid then this leek is unimpressionable. fact4: That symbolizer is not allomerous. fact5: This Edronax does not fossilize gourmandism and is allomerous if that symbolizer does not fossilize gourmandism. fact6: If that symbolizer is a callousness then the fact that this Edronax fossilizes gourmandism is not incorrect. fact7: That crampbark is a callousness. fact8: The fact that that crampbark is a callousness hold if that this leek is not impressionable hold. fact9: If something is not impressionable and this is not a callousness then this is not allomerous. fact10: This vicuna is both not a predestinarian and not allomerous. fact11: That symbolizer is not allomerous and that is not monoploid. fact12: If that symbolizer is allomerous and is non-monoploid this leek is not impressionable. fact13: If the fact that that symbolizer is not monoploid and does not fossilize gourmandism is right this Edronax is not a kind of a callousness.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact2: (¬{B}{c} & {A}{c}) -> ¬{C}{d} fact3: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact4: ¬{AA}{a} fact5: ¬{C}{a} -> (¬{C}{d} & {AA}{d}) fact6: {A}{a} -> {C}{d} fact7: {A}{c} fact8: ¬{B}{b} -> {A}{c} fact9: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AA}x fact10: (¬{EN}{al} & ¬{AA}{al}) fact11: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact12: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact13: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{d}

This Edronax fossilizes gourmandism.

{C}{d}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not impressionable and that thing is not a callousness if that thing does not fossilize gourmandism. fact2: If that crampbark is a kind of unimpressionable one that is a callousness then this Edronax does not fossilize gourmandism. fact3: If that symbolizer is not allomerous and not monoploid then this leek is unimpressionable. fact4: That symbolizer is not allomerous. fact5: This Edronax does not fossilize gourmandism and is allomerous if that symbolizer does not fossilize gourmandism. fact6: If that symbolizer is a callousness then the fact that this Edronax fossilizes gourmandism is not incorrect. fact7: That crampbark is a callousness. fact8: The fact that that crampbark is a callousness hold if that this leek is not impressionable hold. fact9: If something is not impressionable and this is not a callousness then this is not allomerous. fact10: This vicuna is both not a predestinarian and not allomerous. fact11: That symbolizer is not allomerous and that is not monoploid. fact12: If that symbolizer is allomerous and is non-monoploid this leek is not impressionable. fact13: If the fact that that symbolizer is not monoploid and does not fossilize gourmandism is right this Edronax is not a kind of a callousness. ; $hypothesis$ = This Edronax fossilizes gourmandism. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That counteraction does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That that tops occurs causes that that respectfulness happens. fact2: That both this quiescency and that respectfulness happens prevents that that counteraction occurs. fact3: That tops occurs. fact4: The exasperating attribution occurs. fact5: If this overture happens then the admitting happens. fact6: This monologuising Mobius occurs if this fibrilloseness occurs. fact7: This quiescency occurs if the taxis happens. fact8: The popularization occurs. fact9: The taxis occurs. fact10: That unlaxing zymurgy does not occurs and that tops does not happens if this monologuising Mobius occurs.

fact1: {E} -> {C} fact2: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact3: {E} fact4: {DM} fact5: {FQ} -> {CO} fact6: {H} -> {G} fact7: {A} -> {B} fact8: {BM} fact9: {A} fact10: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E})

That counteraction happens.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that tops occurs causes that that respectfulness happens. fact2: That both this quiescency and that respectfulness happens prevents that that counteraction occurs. fact3: That tops occurs. fact4: The exasperating attribution occurs. fact5: If this overture happens then the admitting happens. fact6: This monologuising Mobius occurs if this fibrilloseness occurs. fact7: This quiescency occurs if the taxis happens. fact8: The popularization occurs. fact9: The taxis occurs. fact10: That unlaxing zymurgy does not occurs and that tops does not happens if this monologuising Mobius occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That counteraction does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact9 -> int1: This quiescency happens.; fact1 & fact3 -> int2: That respectfulness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both this quiescency and that respectfulness happens.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That countess is a kind of an extraterrestrial.

{D}{b}

fact1: The advisee is non-paschal but it is ungathered. fact2: If that something is not Nigerian hold that is not a Wilmington and that is not a Hymenanthera. fact3: This wardress is not a Swaziland if that melamine does not authorise Photoblepharon and/or it is a Cynoscephalae. fact4: If someone is not a Wilmington and is not a Hymenanthera this one is an extraterrestrial. fact5: This crockery is a Hymenanthera. fact6: This cholecalciferol is not a kind of an extraterrestrial. fact7: This crockery is a Wilmington if it is not an extraterrestrial and it is not a Swaziland. fact8: Some person is not a handsomeness but Nigerian if the person is not a Swaziland. fact9: That countess is not an extraterrestrial if the fact that this wardress is Nigerian but that person is not a kind of a Hymenanthera does not hold. fact10: If that something is a handsomeness and does not authorise Photoblepharon does not hold then the fact that it is not a handsomeness hold. fact11: Everything is not a Wilmington. fact12: If that pacifist is not a kind of a Wilmington then the fact that this wardress is Nigerian and is not a Hymenanthera is false. fact13: If this wardress is non-Nigerian the fact that that countess is not an extraterrestrial hold. fact14: Either that melamine does not authorise Photoblepharon or it is a kind of a Cynoscephalae or both if the advisee is not paschal. fact15: That the fact that that pacifist is a Wilmington and not a Hymenanthera hold does not hold.

fact1: (¬{I}{d} & {J}{d}) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact3: (¬{G}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact4: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {D}x fact5: {B}{er} fact6: ¬{D}{hh} fact7: (¬{D}{er} & ¬{E}{er}) -> {A}{er} fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{F}x & {C}x) fact9: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact10: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x fact11: (x): ¬{A}x fact12: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact13: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} fact14: ¬{I}{d} -> (¬{G}{c} v {H}{c}) fact15: ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa})

That countess is a kind of an extraterrestrial.

{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The advisee is non-paschal but it is ungathered. fact2: If that something is not Nigerian hold that is not a Wilmington and that is not a Hymenanthera. fact3: This wardress is not a Swaziland if that melamine does not authorise Photoblepharon and/or it is a Cynoscephalae. fact4: If someone is not a Wilmington and is not a Hymenanthera this one is an extraterrestrial. fact5: This crockery is a Hymenanthera. fact6: This cholecalciferol is not a kind of an extraterrestrial. fact7: This crockery is a Wilmington if it is not an extraterrestrial and it is not a Swaziland. fact8: Some person is not a handsomeness but Nigerian if the person is not a Swaziland. fact9: That countess is not an extraterrestrial if the fact that this wardress is Nigerian but that person is not a kind of a Hymenanthera does not hold. fact10: If that something is a handsomeness and does not authorise Photoblepharon does not hold then the fact that it is not a handsomeness hold. fact11: Everything is not a Wilmington. fact12: If that pacifist is not a kind of a Wilmington then the fact that this wardress is Nigerian and is not a Hymenanthera is false. fact13: If this wardress is non-Nigerian the fact that that countess is not an extraterrestrial hold. fact14: Either that melamine does not authorise Photoblepharon or it is a kind of a Cynoscephalae or both if the advisee is not paschal. fact15: That the fact that that pacifist is a Wilmington and not a Hymenanthera hold does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That countess is a kind of an extraterrestrial. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> int1: The fact that that pacifist is not a kind of a Wilmington is correct.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: The fact that this wardress is Nigerian but she/he is not a Hymenanthera is incorrect.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The reluctance is not carbonaceous.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That bortsch is a kind of a dayspring. fact2: The cardcastle does not fancy. fact3: The reluctance is not carbonaceous if that bortsch is a dayspring and fancies.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: ¬{B}{s} fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That bortsch is a kind of a dayspring. fact2: The cardcastle does not fancy. fact3: The reluctance is not carbonaceous if that bortsch is a dayspring and fancies. ; $hypothesis$ = The reluctance is not carbonaceous. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that trolling happens and that eating Tinbergen does not happens does not hold.

¬({C} & ¬{A})

fact1: If that pepticness does not occurs both that perfuming Durant and this deadening dwarfishness happens. fact2: If that that ductlessness occurs and the trichroism does not happens is incorrect that alterableness does not occurs. fact3: This deadening dwarfishness happens. fact4: That this noncriticalness does not occurs results in that that contracting occurs and that unriggedness occurs. fact5: That that unriggedness occurs yields that notthe copying but that aftercare occurs. fact6: If that that alterableness does not occurs is true then both that pirating Adapa and that dying Hemiascomycetes occurs. fact7: This non-pepticness is caused by that that pirating Adapa but notthe copying happens. fact8: That this firing Yazoo but notthe ado occurs is incorrect if that Mercurialness occurs. fact9: This airs occurs and that steerage occurs. fact10: If this penetrating Agrostis happens then that Mercurialness happens. fact11: If this exothermicness does not happens then this noncriticalness does not happens. fact12: That trolling and that perfuming Durant occurs. fact13: Notthat eating Tinbergen but this deadening dwarfishness happens. fact14: If that this firing Yazoo but notthe ado occurs is wrong then this firing Yazoo does not occurs. fact15: The fact that that ductlessness occurs and the trichroism does not happens is false. fact16: This exothermicness does not happens if this firing Yazoo does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {B}) fact2: ¬({S} & ¬{R}) -> ¬{P} fact3: {B} fact4: ¬{K} -> ({J} & {I}) fact5: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) fact6: ¬{P} -> ({F} & {O}) fact7: ({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact8: {Q} -> ¬({M} & ¬{N}) fact9: ({CS} & {HG}) fact10: {T} -> {Q} fact11: ¬{L} -> ¬{K} fact12: ({C} & {D}) fact13: (¬{A} & {B}) fact14: ¬({M} & ¬{N}) -> ¬{M} fact15: ¬({S} & ¬{R}) fact16: ¬{M} -> ¬{L}

That that trolling happens and that eating Tinbergen does not happens does not hold.

¬({C} & ¬{A})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that pepticness does not occurs both that perfuming Durant and this deadening dwarfishness happens. fact2: If that that ductlessness occurs and the trichroism does not happens is incorrect that alterableness does not occurs. fact3: This deadening dwarfishness happens. fact4: That this noncriticalness does not occurs results in that that contracting occurs and that unriggedness occurs. fact5: That that unriggedness occurs yields that notthe copying but that aftercare occurs. fact6: If that that alterableness does not occurs is true then both that pirating Adapa and that dying Hemiascomycetes occurs. fact7: This non-pepticness is caused by that that pirating Adapa but notthe copying happens. fact8: That this firing Yazoo but notthe ado occurs is incorrect if that Mercurialness occurs. fact9: This airs occurs and that steerage occurs. fact10: If this penetrating Agrostis happens then that Mercurialness happens. fact11: If this exothermicness does not happens then this noncriticalness does not happens. fact12: That trolling and that perfuming Durant occurs. fact13: Notthat eating Tinbergen but this deadening dwarfishness happens. fact14: If that this firing Yazoo but notthe ado occurs is wrong then this firing Yazoo does not occurs. fact15: The fact that that ductlessness occurs and the trichroism does not happens is false. fact16: This exothermicness does not happens if this firing Yazoo does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that trolling happens and that eating Tinbergen does not happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> int1: That eating Tinbergen does not occurs.; fact12 -> int2: That trolling happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That abettor is not bumpy.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: If that contraceptive is not Arthurian then that abettor is bumpy. fact2: That that thermoreceptor is not a Merluccius is not incorrect. fact3: If that thermoreceptor is Arthurian then that abettor is structured and/or it is bumpy. fact4: If some person is a bloat that is not unstructured then she/he is not Arthurian. fact5: If that thermoreceptor is not a Merluccius then that contraceptive is a bloat but that thing is not unstructured. fact6: That contraceptive is a bloat.

fact1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {A}{a} fact2: ¬{C}{b} fact3: {B}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} v {A}{a}) fact4: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: ¬{C}{b} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact6: {AA}{aa}

That nullifier is structured.

¬{AB}{ci}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that contraceptive is not Arthurian then that abettor is bumpy. fact2: That that thermoreceptor is not a Merluccius is not incorrect. fact3: If that thermoreceptor is Arthurian then that abettor is structured and/or it is bumpy. fact4: If some person is a bloat that is not unstructured then she/he is not Arthurian. fact5: If that thermoreceptor is not a Merluccius then that contraceptive is a bloat but that thing is not unstructured. fact6: That contraceptive is a bloat. ; $hypothesis$ = That abettor is not bumpy. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: That contraceptive is not Arthurian if that contraceptive is a bloat but this person is not unstructured.; fact5 & fact2 -> int2: That contraceptive is a bloat but not unstructured.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That contraceptive is not Arthurian.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This chapatti is not an utmost but he/she is corbelled.

(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: If someone does not hasten it does not reconstruct and is hipped. fact2: This deposition does shape Bonaparte if it tincts Burt. fact3: Some man is not an utmost but it is corbelled if it does not reconstruct. fact4: If this deposition does shape Bonaparte but it does not inactivate Halevy that megalith does not hasten. fact5: This chapatti does not reconstruct.

fact1: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{A}x & {HA}x) fact2: {E}{a} -> {C}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact4: ({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{B}{bc} fact5: ¬{A}{aa}

That megalith does not reconstruct but that is hipped.

(¬{A}{bc} & {HA}{bc})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If someone does not hasten it does not reconstruct and is hipped. fact2: This deposition does shape Bonaparte if it tincts Burt. fact3: Some man is not an utmost but it is corbelled if it does not reconstruct. fact4: If this deposition does shape Bonaparte but it does not inactivate Halevy that megalith does not hasten. fact5: This chapatti does not reconstruct. ; $hypothesis$ = This chapatti is not an utmost but he/she is corbelled. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This chapatti is not an utmost but this one is not non-corbelled if this chapatti does not reconstruct.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Taos is a terseness.

{B}{a}

fact1: That Taos is not a terseness if that this blastomere swells and/or it is non-gloveless does not hold. fact2: Some man is a modicum but not a Chabad if this person is not indivisible. fact3: If somebody is not a Annapurna then the fact that either it swells or it is not gloveless or both is not correct. fact4: This deposer is not granulomatous if that that thing is advisable and/or that thing is not myalgic does not hold. fact5: If that micrometer is glossopharyngeal she is gloveless. fact6: That Drixoral is not a kind of a lumma and is not a AEC if this pea is not footless. fact7: This deposer is both not non-mutual and non-glossopharyngeal if this deposer is not granulomatous. fact8: That mannikin is a terseness. fact9: That Taos is a euphoria. fact10: That Taos is disloyal. fact11: If the fact that this popularizer is a modicum but it is not a kind of a Chabad is true then this blastomere is not a Annapurna. fact12: That Taos is chorionic if this thing is a kind of a prophase. fact13: If that Taos is gloveless the fact that the person is oaten is correct. fact14: The Kenyan is not a dioptre if the Kenyan is mutual. fact15: The Kenyan is mutual if this deposer is mutual but it is not glossopharyngeal. fact16: That if that Taos is a kind of non-gloveless one that does not swell the traction is a terseness is correct. fact17: If that Drixoral is indivisible then this popularizer is not indivisible. fact18: The fact that this deposer is advisable and/or this is not myalgic is not correct. fact19: This pea is not footless if this separate is a sangria. fact20: The fact that that Taos is gloveless hold. fact21: Something is indivisible and it is antiferromagnetic if it is not a lumma.

fact1: ¬({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x & ¬{E}x) fact3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x v ¬{A}x) fact4: ¬({R}{h} v ¬{Q}{h}) -> ¬{P}{h} fact5: {O}{dk} -> {A}{dk} fact6: ¬{K}{e} -> (¬{I}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) fact7: ¬{P}{h} -> ({N}{h} & ¬{O}{h}) fact8: {B}{en} fact9: {IM}{a} fact10: {DL}{a} fact11: ({F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact12: {HN}{a} -> {DH}{a} fact13: {A}{a} -> {BT}{a} fact14: {N}{g} -> ¬{M}{g} fact15: ({N}{h} & ¬{O}{h}) -> {N}{g} fact16: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {B}{ab} fact17: {G}{d} -> ¬{G}{c} fact18: ¬({R}{h} v ¬{Q}{h}) fact19: {L}{f} -> ¬{K}{e} fact20: {A}{a} fact21: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({G}x & {H}x)

The traction is a terseness.

{B}{ab}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Taos is not a terseness if that this blastomere swells and/or it is non-gloveless does not hold. fact2: Some man is a modicum but not a Chabad if this person is not indivisible. fact3: If somebody is not a Annapurna then the fact that either it swells or it is not gloveless or both is not correct. fact4: This deposer is not granulomatous if that that thing is advisable and/or that thing is not myalgic does not hold. fact5: If that micrometer is glossopharyngeal she is gloveless. fact6: That Drixoral is not a kind of a lumma and is not a AEC if this pea is not footless. fact7: This deposer is both not non-mutual and non-glossopharyngeal if this deposer is not granulomatous. fact8: That mannikin is a terseness. fact9: That Taos is a euphoria. fact10: That Taos is disloyal. fact11: If the fact that this popularizer is a modicum but it is not a kind of a Chabad is true then this blastomere is not a Annapurna. fact12: That Taos is chorionic if this thing is a kind of a prophase. fact13: If that Taos is gloveless the fact that the person is oaten is correct. fact14: The Kenyan is not a dioptre if the Kenyan is mutual. fact15: The Kenyan is mutual if this deposer is mutual but it is not glossopharyngeal. fact16: That if that Taos is a kind of non-gloveless one that does not swell the traction is a terseness is correct. fact17: If that Drixoral is indivisible then this popularizer is not indivisible. fact18: The fact that this deposer is advisable and/or this is not myalgic is not correct. fact19: This pea is not footless if this separate is a sangria. fact20: The fact that that Taos is gloveless hold. fact21: Something is indivisible and it is antiferromagnetic if it is not a lumma. ; $hypothesis$ = That Taos is a terseness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That schoolfellow miffs Ventose and is a pip.

({A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: Everything is a mishmash and/or the thing is big. fact2: If the fact that something is not a kind of a weatherliness is correct then that this miffs Ventose and this is a pip is false. fact3: Something miffs Ventose and is a pip if it is not big. fact4: That schoolfellow miffs Ventose. fact5: That schoolfellow is a kind of carcinogenic one that embrangles. fact6: that Ventose miffs schoolfellow. fact7: That enthusiast composes if that that that schoolfellow does not composes and does not housekeeping voluminosity hold is wrong. fact8: That schoolfellow is ashamed. fact9: That schoolfellow is a dysarthria. fact10: That schoolfellow is a Indian. fact11: If that schoolfellow is a Indian then the fact that that schoolfellow does not compose and she does not housekeeping voluminosity does not hold. fact12: If that philosopher is big then that enthusiast is not big. fact13: If some person composes then it is not a kind of an unemployed. fact14: That philosopher is big if the gaffsail is a kind of a mishmash. fact15: The naloxone miffs Ventose. fact16: If someone is not a kind of an unemployed then it is a Peristediinae that is a kind of a weatherliness. fact17: The fact that that schoolfellow is a pip is true. fact18: Elba composes and that one miffs Ventose. fact19: The troller is a pip.

fact1: (x): ({I}x v {F}x) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact4: {A}{a} fact5: ({HP}{a} & {ES}{a}) fact6: {AA}{aa} fact7: ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{H}{a}) -> {E}{eu} fact8: {GN}{a} fact9: {FP}{a} fact10: {G}{a} fact11: {G}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{H}{a}) fact12: {F}{b} -> ¬{F}{eu} fact13: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}x fact14: {I}{c} -> {F}{b} fact15: {A}{bm} fact16: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({DC}x & {C}x) fact17: {B}{a} fact18: ({E}{bb} & {A}{bb}) fact19: {B}{af}

That enthusiast is a kind of a Peristediinae and he is a kind of a pip.

({DC}{eu} & {B}{eu})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a mishmash and/or the thing is big. fact2: If the fact that something is not a kind of a weatherliness is correct then that this miffs Ventose and this is a pip is false. fact3: Something miffs Ventose and is a pip if it is not big. fact4: That schoolfellow miffs Ventose. fact5: That schoolfellow is a kind of carcinogenic one that embrangles. fact6: that Ventose miffs schoolfellow. fact7: That enthusiast composes if that that that schoolfellow does not composes and does not housekeeping voluminosity hold is wrong. fact8: That schoolfellow is ashamed. fact9: That schoolfellow is a dysarthria. fact10: That schoolfellow is a Indian. fact11: If that schoolfellow is a Indian then the fact that that schoolfellow does not compose and she does not housekeeping voluminosity does not hold. fact12: If that philosopher is big then that enthusiast is not big. fact13: If some person composes then it is not a kind of an unemployed. fact14: That philosopher is big if the gaffsail is a kind of a mishmash. fact15: The naloxone miffs Ventose. fact16: If someone is not a kind of an unemployed then it is a Peristediinae that is a kind of a weatherliness. fact17: The fact that that schoolfellow is a pip is true. fact18: Elba composes and that one miffs Ventose. fact19: The troller is a pip. ; $hypothesis$ = That schoolfellow miffs Ventose and is a pip. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This offensiveness happens.

{B}

fact1: The craniometricness occurs and this offensiveness happens.

fact1: ({A} & {B})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The craniometricness occurs and this offensiveness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This offensiveness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this elution is a contour if the fact that that epicranium does dish Spokane hold is false.

¬({A}{a} -> {B}{b})

fact1: That epicranium is acquisitive if this elution is reasonable. fact2: This elution is not reasonable if that epicranium dishes Spokane. fact3: Someone is a contour if it does not dish Spokane and it is unacquisitive. fact4: If this elution is a kind of a contour then that epicranium is reasonable. fact5: This pyralid is acquisitive. fact6: This elution is not reasonable and it does not tidings. fact7: If this elution does dish Spokane then that epicranium is not acquisitive and this is not a contour. fact8: This elution is not plausible and the thing is not diatomic. fact9: If that epicranium is reasonable then this elution dishes Spokane. fact10: This elution is not reasonable. fact11: This elution is a sick. fact12: This elution is acquisitive if this elution is not reasonable and it does not dish Spokane. fact13: Some man is a contour if it is not acquisitive and not unreasonable. fact14: This elution dishes Spokane if that epicranium is acquisitive. fact15: If something is a kind of non-acquisitive thing that is not reasonable then it is a contour. fact16: This elution is a contour if this elution is not acquisitive but it is reasonable. fact17: If that epicranium dishes Spokane then this elution is a kind of unacquisitive thing that is unreasonable. fact18: This elution is reasonable if that epicranium is acquisitive.

fact1: {AB}{b} -> {AA}{a} fact2: {A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} fact3: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {B}x fact4: {B}{b} -> {AB}{a} fact5: {AA}{c} fact6: (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{O}{b}) fact7: {A}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact8: (¬{AD}{b} & ¬{FH}{b}) fact9: {AB}{a} -> {A}{b} fact10: ¬{AB}{b} fact11: {FU}{b} fact12: (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {AA}{b} fact13: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact14: {AA}{a} -> {A}{b} fact15: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact16: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b} fact17: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact18: {AA}{a} -> {AB}{b}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That epicranium is acquisitive if this elution is reasonable. fact2: This elution is not reasonable if that epicranium dishes Spokane. fact3: Someone is a contour if it does not dish Spokane and it is unacquisitive. fact4: If this elution is a kind of a contour then that epicranium is reasonable. fact5: This pyralid is acquisitive. fact6: This elution is not reasonable and it does not tidings. fact7: If this elution does dish Spokane then that epicranium is not acquisitive and this is not a contour. fact8: This elution is not plausible and the thing is not diatomic. fact9: If that epicranium is reasonable then this elution dishes Spokane. fact10: This elution is not reasonable. fact11: This elution is a sick. fact12: This elution is acquisitive if this elution is not reasonable and it does not dish Spokane. fact13: Some man is a contour if it is not acquisitive and not unreasonable. fact14: This elution dishes Spokane if that epicranium is acquisitive. fact15: If something is a kind of non-acquisitive thing that is not reasonable then it is a contour. fact16: This elution is a contour if this elution is not acquisitive but it is reasonable. fact17: If that epicranium dishes Spokane then this elution is a kind of unacquisitive thing that is unreasonable. fact18: This elution is reasonable if that epicranium is acquisitive. ; $hypothesis$ = That this elution is a contour if the fact that that epicranium does dish Spokane hold is false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that epicranium dishes Spokane.; fact17 & assump1 -> int1: This elution is unacquisitive and not reasonable.; fact15 -> int2: If this elution is not acquisitive and is not reasonable that person is a kind of a contour.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This elution is a contour.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This deck is not organicistic.

¬{A}{c}

fact1: This deck is organicistic if that best does prehend. fact2: That best prehends if Remy does not exhaust Cephalotaxus and thirsts elitism. fact3: That best empties if that Hamlet fastens yesteryear. fact4: If this cayman is not impatient then that this thing does not displume and this thing is anaphasic does not hold. fact5: Remy does not prehend and/or is not organicistic if that best empties. fact6: If that this cayman does not displume but it is anaphasic is wrong then the fact that that Hamlet is not dioecian hold. fact7: If something is not dioecian then it fastens yesteryear and it frustrates Anabrus. fact8: If this deck thirsts elitism but it does not prehend Remy is organicistic. fact9: That best prehends if Remy does not exhaust Cephalotaxus and does not thirst elitism.

fact1: {B}{b} -> {A}{c} fact2: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact3: {D}{d} -> {C}{b} fact4: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬(¬{G}{e} & {H}{e}) fact5: {C}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) fact6: ¬(¬{G}{e} & {H}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} fact7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) fact8: ({AB}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> {A}{a} fact9: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b}

This deck is not organicistic.

¬{A}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This deck is organicistic if that best does prehend. fact2: That best prehends if Remy does not exhaust Cephalotaxus and thirsts elitism. fact3: That best empties if that Hamlet fastens yesteryear. fact4: If this cayman is not impatient then that this thing does not displume and this thing is anaphasic does not hold. fact5: Remy does not prehend and/or is not organicistic if that best empties. fact6: If that this cayman does not displume but it is anaphasic is wrong then the fact that that Hamlet is not dioecian hold. fact7: If something is not dioecian then it fastens yesteryear and it frustrates Anabrus. fact8: If this deck thirsts elitism but it does not prehend Remy is organicistic. fact9: That best prehends if Remy does not exhaust Cephalotaxus and does not thirst elitism. ; $hypothesis$ = This deck is not organicistic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that this spout does not glue Greensboro and is not stomachal is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That analgesic is not a scorched and it is not a pessimism. fact2: The fact that that analgesic does not glue Greensboro and does not cognize Frick is false. fact3: If the fact that this spout does not glue Greensboro and that person is not stomachal does not hold then that analgesic cognizes Frick. fact4: The fact that this spout does not glue Greensboro and that thing is not stomachal does not hold if that analgesic is a kind of a hyperboloid. fact5: If this spout glues Greensboro then that analgesic cognizes Frick. fact6: If some man that discolorizes Casuaridae is an ineptness the one does not separate Helwingia. fact7: If someone is a kind of a hyperboloid then that it does not glue Greensboro and it is not stomachal is false. fact8: This spout is a hyperboloid if that analgesic does not cognize Frick and is an infirmity. fact9: This spout does not glue Greensboro. fact10: That this spout does glue Greensboro and is not stomachal is not correct. fact11: this Frick does not cognize analgesic. fact12: That analgesic does not cognize Frick but it is a kind of an infirmity if this attendant does not separate Helwingia.

fact1: (¬{G}{b} & ¬{BJ}{b}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact4: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: {AA}{a} -> {B}{b} fact6: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact7: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact8: (¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {A}{a} fact9: ¬{AA}{a} fact10: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact11: ¬{AD}{ab} fact12: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{B}{b} & {C}{b})

Let's assume that that this spout does not glue Greensboro and is not stomachal is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That analgesic is not a scorched and it is not a pessimism. fact2: The fact that that analgesic does not glue Greensboro and does not cognize Frick is false. fact3: If the fact that this spout does not glue Greensboro and that person is not stomachal does not hold then that analgesic cognizes Frick. fact4: The fact that this spout does not glue Greensboro and that thing is not stomachal does not hold if that analgesic is a kind of a hyperboloid. fact5: If this spout glues Greensboro then that analgesic cognizes Frick. fact6: If some man that discolorizes Casuaridae is an ineptness the one does not separate Helwingia. fact7: If someone is a kind of a hyperboloid then that it does not glue Greensboro and it is not stomachal is false. fact8: This spout is a hyperboloid if that analgesic does not cognize Frick and is an infirmity. fact9: This spout does not glue Greensboro. fact10: That this spout does glue Greensboro and is not stomachal is not correct. fact11: this Frick does not cognize analgesic. fact12: That analgesic does not cognize Frick but it is a kind of an infirmity if this attendant does not separate Helwingia. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that this spout does not glue Greensboro and is not stomachal is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This court happens.

{D}

fact1: This court happens if that this court does not occurs and that leave does not happens is false. fact2: That leave does not happens. fact3: That tracheostomy does not happens. fact4: If that that pondering occurs hold then this court does not happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{A}) -> {D} fact2: ¬{A} fact3: ¬{B} fact4: {C} -> ¬{D}

This court happens.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This court happens if that this court does not occurs and that leave does not happens is false. fact2: That leave does not happens. fact3: That tracheostomy does not happens. fact4: If that that pondering occurs hold then this court does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This court happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that this headman is a Nestorian and it is a gladfulness does not hold is correct.

¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: If some person needs then it is a Nestorian. fact2: If that tinderbox is granular this headman is a kind of a Nestorian. fact3: If this headman is monozygotic but this thing is not a kind of a Ussher this thing is not a Salerno. fact4: The spindleberry is a kind of a quartan but it is not a Wahunsonacock. fact5: The fact that some man needs and this person is granular hold if this person is not a gladfulness. fact6: That tinderbox needs. fact7: If that tinderbox needs this person is granular. fact8: This headman is monozygotic and is not a Ussher. fact9: If something does not need then that it is a Nestorian and it is a gladfulness does not hold. fact10: If someone is not a Salerno the person is a kind of a gladfulness.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact2: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact3: ({F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact4: ({DB}{o} & ¬{FQ}{o}) fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact6: {A}{a} fact7: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact8: ({F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {D}x) fact10: (x): ¬{E}x -> {D}x

The fact that that this headman is a Nestorian and it is a gladfulness does not hold is correct.

¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person needs then it is a Nestorian. fact2: If that tinderbox is granular this headman is a kind of a Nestorian. fact3: If this headman is monozygotic but this thing is not a kind of a Ussher this thing is not a Salerno. fact4: The spindleberry is a kind of a quartan but it is not a Wahunsonacock. fact5: The fact that some man needs and this person is granular hold if this person is not a gladfulness. fact6: That tinderbox needs. fact7: If that tinderbox needs this person is granular. fact8: This headman is monozygotic and is not a Ussher. fact9: If something does not need then that it is a Nestorian and it is a gladfulness does not hold. fact10: If someone is not a Salerno the person is a kind of a gladfulness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that this headman is a Nestorian and it is a gladfulness does not hold is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact6 -> int1: That tinderbox is granular.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This headman is a Nestorian.; fact10 -> int3: If this headman is not a Salerno then this headman is a kind of a gladfulness.; fact8 & fact3 -> int4: This headman is not a Salerno.; int3 & int4 -> int5: This headman is a gladfulness.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That nuncio is binuclear.

{D}{b}

fact1: If a non-aeronautic thing is not a Seriphus then that does not labour. fact2: If that polysaccharide is not a Catacala the fact that this hypnotizer is benthic and a Dorado is false. fact3: If that gametophore does not labour that the Ironsides is not a Carpentaria and is syncretistical hold. fact4: This firefighter is a paling. fact5: That nuncio is not binuclear if this firefighter is not a paling but it is binuclear. fact6: Some man is not a kind of a Dorado if that he/she is benthic and he/she is a kind of a Dorado is incorrect. fact7: That nuncio is syncretistical. fact8: If the Ironsides is not a Carpentaria but this thing is syncretistical that dioxide is syncretistical. fact9: This firefighter is both not a paling and binuclear if that dioxide is syncretistical. fact10: If that that nuncio is a kind of a Carpentaria and/or she is binuclear is true then this firefighter does not labour. fact11: Something is non-aeronautic and it is not a kind of a Seriphus if it is not a certificate. fact12: This firefighter is syncretistical and the person is a paling. fact13: This churidars is syncretistical a paling if this firefighter does not labour. fact14: That nuncio labours if this firefighter is syncretistical. fact15: The fact that that polysaccharide is not a Catacala hold if Michele is a Catacala. fact16: This firefighter is a kind of a sangaree if this firefighter is syncretistical. fact17: If this hypnotizer is not a kind of a Dorado then that masculinization is not a Dorado. fact18: Some man is not a certificate if that it is a certificate and not a subsistence does not hold. fact19: Michele is both an iota and a Catacala. fact20: If that masculinization is not a Dorado this cyprinid is decisive and it is immediate.

fact1: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{C}x fact2: ¬{N}{i} -> ¬({M}{h} & {L}{h}) fact3: ¬{C}{e} -> (¬{E}{d} & {A}{d}) fact4: {B}{a} fact5: (¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact6: (x): ¬({M}x & {L}x) -> ¬{L}x fact7: {A}{b} fact8: (¬{E}{d} & {A}{d}) -> {A}{c} fact9: {A}{c} -> (¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) fact10: ({E}{b} v {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact11: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) fact12: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact13: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{dh} & {B}{dh}) fact14: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} fact15: {N}{j} -> ¬{N}{i} fact16: {A}{a} -> {FL}{a} fact17: ¬{L}{h} -> ¬{L}{g} fact18: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}x fact19: ({O}{j} & {N}{j}) fact20: ¬{L}{g} -> ({I}{f} & {K}{f})

That nuncio is not binuclear.

¬{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If a non-aeronautic thing is not a Seriphus then that does not labour. fact2: If that polysaccharide is not a Catacala the fact that this hypnotizer is benthic and a Dorado is false. fact3: If that gametophore does not labour that the Ironsides is not a Carpentaria and is syncretistical hold. fact4: This firefighter is a paling. fact5: That nuncio is not binuclear if this firefighter is not a paling but it is binuclear. fact6: Some man is not a kind of a Dorado if that he/she is benthic and he/she is a kind of a Dorado is incorrect. fact7: That nuncio is syncretistical. fact8: If the Ironsides is not a Carpentaria but this thing is syncretistical that dioxide is syncretistical. fact9: This firefighter is both not a paling and binuclear if that dioxide is syncretistical. fact10: If that that nuncio is a kind of a Carpentaria and/or she is binuclear is true then this firefighter does not labour. fact11: Something is non-aeronautic and it is not a kind of a Seriphus if it is not a certificate. fact12: This firefighter is syncretistical and the person is a paling. fact13: This churidars is syncretistical a paling if this firefighter does not labour. fact14: That nuncio labours if this firefighter is syncretistical. fact15: The fact that that polysaccharide is not a Catacala hold if Michele is a Catacala. fact16: This firefighter is a kind of a sangaree if this firefighter is syncretistical. fact17: If this hypnotizer is not a kind of a Dorado then that masculinization is not a Dorado. fact18: Some man is not a certificate if that it is a certificate and not a subsistence does not hold. fact19: Michele is both an iota and a Catacala. fact20: If that masculinization is not a Dorado this cyprinid is decisive and it is immediate. ; $hypothesis$ = That nuncio is binuclear. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that the holocaust occurs and this rending does not occurs is wrong.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: The fact that both the sorrowfulness and the leadedness occurs does not hold. fact2: If that light does not happens then this cartage does not happens and this layup does not occurs. fact3: That the decolourising and the non-ornithologicalness occurs is wrong. fact4: That the axileness occurs and the adding vassalage does not occurs does not hold. fact5: That laughter does not happens if the fact that this evolving peevishness occurs and that laughter occurs does not hold. fact6: The fact that both the holocaust and this rending occurs is not true. fact7: If that laughter does not occurs then that parking southwards does not occurs and/or the iconolatry does not occurs. fact8: That both that light and this flush happens is wrong if that likeableness does not happens. fact9: The fact that that worsening Decapterus happens and this moonlessness does not occurs is incorrect. fact10: If that bed occurs then the fact that that biogenousness but notthe airing happens is wrong. fact11: That the exotericness happens but the West does not happens does not hold. fact12: That nim does not happens and this questioning does not happens if the fact that this cartage does not happens is right. fact13: That light does not happens if that that light and this flush happens does not hold. fact14: That this strafing happens and this overjoying Scleroderma does not occurs is wrong. fact15: The fact that this alarming praesidium but notthe cracking happens does not hold. fact16: The fact that the analphabetic happens but this routing proverb does not occurs does not hold. fact17: That the vocation but notthe blasting vigor occurs is false. fact18: That this evolving peevishness and that laughter occurs does not hold if that nim does not happens.

fact1: ¬({DA} & ¬{AE}) fact2: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) fact3: ¬({IN} & ¬{GB}) fact4: ¬({Q} & ¬{GA}) fact5: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact6: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact7: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} v ¬{B}) fact8: ¬{L} -> ¬({J} & {K}) fact9: ¬({O} & ¬{AJ}) fact10: {A} -> ¬({CD} & ¬{JI}) fact11: ¬({DB} & ¬{AO}) fact12: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) fact13: ¬({J} & {K}) -> ¬{J} fact14: ¬({P} & ¬{DU}) fact15: ¬({EA} & ¬{DP}) fact16: ¬({JA} & ¬{FK}) fact17: ¬({AT} & ¬{GM}) fact18: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D})

That that biogenousness but notthe airing happens is wrong.

¬({CD} & ¬{JI})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that both the sorrowfulness and the leadedness occurs does not hold. fact2: If that light does not happens then this cartage does not happens and this layup does not occurs. fact3: That the decolourising and the non-ornithologicalness occurs is wrong. fact4: That the axileness occurs and the adding vassalage does not occurs does not hold. fact5: That laughter does not happens if the fact that this evolving peevishness occurs and that laughter occurs does not hold. fact6: The fact that both the holocaust and this rending occurs is not true. fact7: If that laughter does not occurs then that parking southwards does not occurs and/or the iconolatry does not occurs. fact8: That both that light and this flush happens is wrong if that likeableness does not happens. fact9: The fact that that worsening Decapterus happens and this moonlessness does not occurs is incorrect. fact10: If that bed occurs then the fact that that biogenousness but notthe airing happens is wrong. fact11: That the exotericness happens but the West does not happens does not hold. fact12: That nim does not happens and this questioning does not happens if the fact that this cartage does not happens is right. fact13: That light does not happens if that that light and this flush happens does not hold. fact14: That this strafing happens and this overjoying Scleroderma does not occurs is wrong. fact15: The fact that this alarming praesidium but notthe cracking happens does not hold. fact16: The fact that the analphabetic happens but this routing proverb does not occurs does not hold. fact17: That the vocation but notthe blasting vigor occurs is false. fact18: That this evolving peevishness and that laughter occurs does not hold if that nim does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the holocaust occurs and this rending does not occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that that masterstroke happens or the victimization does not occurs or both does not hold is right.

¬({AA} v ¬{AB})

fact1: The fact that that stablingness occurs and/or the eddy does not happens does not hold. fact2: The fact that that resettling rolled happens and/or the compartmentalization does not occurs does not hold if this barreling does not occurs. fact3: Both that perjury and this Laputanness occurs if that trabecularness does not occurs. fact4: If notthis driness but this foretelling Cachi occurs then that polarisation does not happens. fact5: This candidacy does not happens and that solfeggio does not occurs if this Shintoistness happens. fact6: This Shintoistness happens. fact7: The fact that this neologism happens and that snuggle occurs is true if that solfeggio does not happens. fact8: If this Shintoistness happens then that trabecularness occurs. fact9: That solfeggio does not happens if the fact that this candidacy does not happens and that solfeggio happens is false. fact10: If this neologism does not occurs that that perjury and that snuggle happens does not hold. fact11: That liquidating Kellogg happens. fact12: This barreling does not happens if that snuggle happens and that perjury occurs. fact13: If that that trabecularness occurs hold then that this candidacy does not happens and that solfeggio occurs does not hold. fact14: That that that masterstroke happens or the victimization does not occurs or both does not hold is right. fact15: That this Shintoistness is triggered by that that liquidating Kellogg occurs but that polarisation does not occurs is not wrong. fact16: That masterstroke occurs or the victimization does not happens or both if this barreling does not occurs.

fact1: ¬({DB} v ¬{IO}) fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬({JF} v ¬{HO}) fact3: ¬{H} -> ({B} & {E}) fact4: (¬{L} & {M}) -> ¬{K} fact5: {I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) fact6: {I} fact7: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {C}) fact8: {I} -> {H} fact9: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{F} fact10: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact11: {J} fact12: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} fact13: {H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F}) fact14: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact15: ({J} & ¬{K}) -> {I} fact16: ¬{A} -> ({AA} v ¬{AB})

That masterstroke happens and/or the victimization does not happens.

({AA} v ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that stablingness occurs and/or the eddy does not happens does not hold. fact2: The fact that that resettling rolled happens and/or the compartmentalization does not occurs does not hold if this barreling does not occurs. fact3: Both that perjury and this Laputanness occurs if that trabecularness does not occurs. fact4: If notthis driness but this foretelling Cachi occurs then that polarisation does not happens. fact5: This candidacy does not happens and that solfeggio does not occurs if this Shintoistness happens. fact6: This Shintoistness happens. fact7: The fact that this neologism happens and that snuggle occurs is true if that solfeggio does not happens. fact8: If this Shintoistness happens then that trabecularness occurs. fact9: That solfeggio does not happens if the fact that this candidacy does not happens and that solfeggio happens is false. fact10: If this neologism does not occurs that that perjury and that snuggle happens does not hold. fact11: That liquidating Kellogg happens. fact12: This barreling does not happens if that snuggle happens and that perjury occurs. fact13: If that that trabecularness occurs hold then that this candidacy does not happens and that solfeggio occurs does not hold. fact14: That that that masterstroke happens or the victimization does not occurs or both does not hold is right. fact15: That this Shintoistness is triggered by that that liquidating Kellogg occurs but that polarisation does not occurs is not wrong. fact16: That masterstroke occurs or the victimization does not happens or both if this barreling does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that that masterstroke happens or the victimization does not occurs or both does not hold is right. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This jackstraws does not isolate inequality.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: This jackstraws does not appall. fact2: That something noises and is not a capriccio does not hold if it is non-connubial. fact3: The fact that the authoress does not isolate inequality hold. fact4: Something does isolate inequality if the fact that it noises and is not a capriccio is false. fact5: That Pyrethrum impoverishes pteridology. fact6: That Pyrethrum impoverishes pteridology if that Pyrethrum noises. fact7: If that Pyrethrum does not appall but it does impoverish pteridology then this jackstraws does not isolate inequality. fact8: If that Pyrethrum noises then that Pyrethrum does not appall but it does impoverish pteridology. fact9: Something is non-idealistic thing that appalls if it does not noise.

fact1: ¬{AA}{b} fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) fact3: ¬{B}{gf} fact4: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}x fact5: {AB}{a} fact6: {A}{a} -> {AB}{a} fact7: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact8: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{E}x & {AA}x)

This jackstraws isolates inequality.

{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This jackstraws does not appall. fact2: That something noises and is not a capriccio does not hold if it is non-connubial. fact3: The fact that the authoress does not isolate inequality hold. fact4: Something does isolate inequality if the fact that it noises and is not a capriccio is false. fact5: That Pyrethrum impoverishes pteridology. fact6: That Pyrethrum impoverishes pteridology if that Pyrethrum noises. fact7: If that Pyrethrum does not appall but it does impoverish pteridology then this jackstraws does not isolate inequality. fact8: If that Pyrethrum noises then that Pyrethrum does not appall but it does impoverish pteridology. fact9: Something is non-idealistic thing that appalls if it does not noise. ; $hypothesis$ = This jackstraws does not isolate inequality. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That carding Tectona happens.

{B}

fact1: That this equation happens and this jostling occurs is triggered by this non-antimoniousness. fact2: That decreasing millifarad happens if the fact that that that decreasing millifarad does not happens and this indexation happens does not hold is correct. fact3: If that unvigilantness does not happens the spreeing and that clutches happens. fact4: This cryptologicness does not happens. fact5: That carding Tectona does not occurs if either that anhydrousness occurs or this lodging billionth does not happens or both. fact6: If this potentialness does not occurs this cryptologicness and that carding Tectona occurs. fact7: This tonometry or the shuffling or both is triggered by this non-fishiness. fact8: This aeriferousness occurs and/or the apprehension does not happens if the fact that this cryptologicness happens is right. fact9: This non-antimoniousness is caused by that that decreasing millifarad and that submitting Mithraicism occurs. fact10: That anhydrousness happens and/or this lodging billionth occurs. fact11: That that notthat decreasing millifarad but this indexation happens is correct is incorrect if that clutches occurs. fact12: That carding Tectona does not happens if the fact that this lodging billionth does not happens is true. fact13: That both the residualness and that illegalness occurs does not hold. fact14: If that the residualness occurs and that illegalness happens does not hold that unvigilantness does not occurs. fact15: This cryptologicness occurs or this potentialness occurs or both if this exclaiming Kachinic does not occurs. fact16: That anhydrousness occurs and/or this lodging billionth does not occurs if that this cryptologicness does not happens is right. fact17: If the fact that this jostling happens is true then both this exclaiming Kachinic and this non-potentialness happens.

fact1: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) fact2: ¬(¬{I} & {K}) -> {I} fact3: ¬{N} -> ({M} & {L}) fact4: ¬{A} fact5: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact6: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact7: ¬{HJ} -> ({EO} v {GK}) fact8: {A} -> ({JI} v ¬{DO}) fact9: ({I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} fact10: ({AA} v {AB}) fact11: {L} -> ¬(¬{I} & {K}) fact12: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} fact13: ¬({O} & {P}) fact14: ¬({O} & {P}) -> ¬{N} fact15: ¬{D} -> ({A} v {C}) fact16: ¬{A} -> ({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact17: {E} -> ({D} & ¬{C})

That carding Tectona happens.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this equation happens and this jostling occurs is triggered by this non-antimoniousness. fact2: That decreasing millifarad happens if the fact that that that decreasing millifarad does not happens and this indexation happens does not hold is correct. fact3: If that unvigilantness does not happens the spreeing and that clutches happens. fact4: This cryptologicness does not happens. fact5: That carding Tectona does not occurs if either that anhydrousness occurs or this lodging billionth does not happens or both. fact6: If this potentialness does not occurs this cryptologicness and that carding Tectona occurs. fact7: This tonometry or the shuffling or both is triggered by this non-fishiness. fact8: This aeriferousness occurs and/or the apprehension does not happens if the fact that this cryptologicness happens is right. fact9: This non-antimoniousness is caused by that that decreasing millifarad and that submitting Mithraicism occurs. fact10: That anhydrousness happens and/or this lodging billionth occurs. fact11: That that notthat decreasing millifarad but this indexation happens is correct is incorrect if that clutches occurs. fact12: That carding Tectona does not happens if the fact that this lodging billionth does not happens is true. fact13: That both the residualness and that illegalness occurs does not hold. fact14: If that the residualness occurs and that illegalness happens does not hold that unvigilantness does not occurs. fact15: This cryptologicness occurs or this potentialness occurs or both if this exclaiming Kachinic does not occurs. fact16: That anhydrousness occurs and/or this lodging billionth does not occurs if that this cryptologicness does not happens is right. fact17: If the fact that this jostling happens is true then both this exclaiming Kachinic and this non-potentialness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That carding Tectona happens. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact4 -> int1: That anhydrousness happens or this lodging billionth does not happens or both.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That shelter is not a kind of a Ukraine.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That Prevacid pays Erving. fact2: That shelter is a kind of a Gaza if that Prevacid is a Ukraine. fact3: If that shelter is a kind of a Gaza that Prevacid is a kind of a Ukraine. fact4: If that Prevacid does not pay Erving then that shelter does not pay Erving. fact5: If some person that does not pay Erving is not a kind of a Gaza the one is not a Ukraine. fact6: That shelter is a Ukraine if that Prevacid is a Gaza.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} fact3: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact4: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x fact6: {A}{a} -> {C}{b}

That shelter is not a kind of a Ukraine.

¬{C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Prevacid pays Erving. fact2: That shelter is a kind of a Gaza if that Prevacid is a Ukraine. fact3: If that shelter is a kind of a Gaza that Prevacid is a kind of a Ukraine. fact4: If that Prevacid does not pay Erving then that shelter does not pay Erving. fact5: If some person that does not pay Erving is not a kind of a Gaza the one is not a Ukraine. fact6: That shelter is a Ukraine if that Prevacid is a Gaza. ; $hypothesis$ = That shelter is not a kind of a Ukraine. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This blowing raw does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: This dissipating Lavoisier does not occurs if the fact that that subliming Millais does not happens and this seclusion does not happens is false. fact2: That austeniticness does not happens if this dissipating Lavoisier does not occurs or that carbureting unlikeness does not happens or both. fact3: This pushing occurs. fact4: That this blowing raw does not happens is correct if the fact that this pushing and this blowing raw occurs does not hold. fact5: If that austeniticness does not happens then that this pushing occurs and this blowing raw happens does not hold.

fact1: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{D} fact2: (¬{D} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact3: {A} fact4: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B})

This blowing raw does not occurs.

¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This dissipating Lavoisier does not occurs if the fact that that subliming Millais does not happens and this seclusion does not happens is false. fact2: That austeniticness does not happens if this dissipating Lavoisier does not occurs or that carbureting unlikeness does not happens or both. fact3: This pushing occurs. fact4: That this blowing raw does not happens is correct if the fact that this pushing and this blowing raw occurs does not hold. fact5: If that austeniticness does not happens then that this pushing occurs and this blowing raw happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This blowing raw does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that skywalk is not a Astacura.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This frangipanni is not a Vicia. fact2: If this hematemesis is not a Meliaceae but this thing is flagellate that skywalk is flagellate. fact3: If Sal is a banning then this hematemesis is flagellate. fact4: If Sal is non-flagellate then this hematemesis is both not a Astacura and not a banning. fact5: The sarong is a kind of a Astacura. fact6: This hematemesis is non-flagellate if that that skywalk is not a Astacura hold. fact7: Some man is not a kind of a Tatum. fact8: Some person is not flagellate if it is either not a Tatum or a Meliaceae or both. fact9: This frangipanni is a monandry that clews Lentia if this frangipanni is not a Vicia. fact10: If something is not a banning then that this is not a Meliaceae and this is flagellate is correct. fact11: That that skywalk is not a Astacura if this hematemesis is not a Astacura and it is not a banning hold. fact12: That skywalk is flagellate. fact13: Sal is a banning.

fact1: ¬{I}{d} fact2: (¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) -> {B}{a} fact3: {C}{c} -> {B}{b} fact4: ¬{B}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact5: {A}{hl} fact6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact7: (Ex): ¬{E}x fact8: (x): (¬{E}x v {D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: ¬{I}{d} -> ({G}{d} & {H}{d}) fact10: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{D}x & {B}x) fact11: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact12: {B}{a} fact13: {C}{c}

Let's assume that that skywalk is not a Astacura.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This frangipanni is not a Vicia. fact2: If this hematemesis is not a Meliaceae but this thing is flagellate that skywalk is flagellate. fact3: If Sal is a banning then this hematemesis is flagellate. fact4: If Sal is non-flagellate then this hematemesis is both not a Astacura and not a banning. fact5: The sarong is a kind of a Astacura. fact6: This hematemesis is non-flagellate if that that skywalk is not a Astacura hold. fact7: Some man is not a kind of a Tatum. fact8: Some person is not flagellate if it is either not a Tatum or a Meliaceae or both. fact9: This frangipanni is a monandry that clews Lentia if this frangipanni is not a Vicia. fact10: If something is not a banning then that this is not a Meliaceae and this is flagellate is correct. fact11: That that skywalk is not a Astacura if this hematemesis is not a Astacura and it is not a banning hold. fact12: That skywalk is flagellate. fact13: Sal is a banning. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that skywalk is not a Astacura. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that skywalk is not a Astacura.; fact6 & assump1 -> int1: This hematemesis is not flagellate.; fact13 & fact3 -> int2: That this hematemesis is flagellate is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The clitoricness happens.

{D}

fact1: That this non-supernaturalness and that unexportableness occurs does not hold. fact2: The unobjectionableness and this parasympathomimeticness occurs. fact3: The fact that the parodying Runyon does not happens and this roiling progressivism does not occurs is wrong. fact4: The mould does not occurs. fact5: If the echolocation and this interlinking kb occurs then the fact that the sorting does not happens is correct. fact6: If that the fact that this punishing Fitzgerald does not happens and the contralateralness does not occurs is false hold then the contralateralness happens. fact7: The assenting happens and this purple occurs. fact8: That undramaticness does not happens. fact9: The fact that this randomness and this non-Mendelianness occurs does not hold. fact10: This dieting does not happens. fact11: This roiling progressivism occurs if the fact that the parodying Runyon does not occurs and this roiling progressivism does not happens is false. fact12: That the defiling fanatism does not occurs and the coveting does not occurs does not hold. fact13: That narrowing cytogenetics happens. fact14: This romancing happens if the fact that the sirocco does not occurs and this romancing does not occurs is incorrect.

fact1: ¬(¬{JH} & ¬{HE}) fact2: ({HL} & {IJ}) fact3: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{C}) fact4: ¬{DD} fact5: ({AC} & {CF}) -> ¬{S} fact6: ¬(¬{JF} & ¬{AA}) -> {AA} fact7: ({A} & {B}) fact8: ¬{JB} fact9: ¬(¬{AN} & ¬{AG}) fact10: ¬{FA} fact11: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{C}) -> {C} fact12: ¬(¬{IQ} & ¬{AS}) fact13: {K} fact14: ¬(¬{FU} & ¬{BL}) -> {BL}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this non-supernaturalness and that unexportableness occurs does not hold. fact2: The unobjectionableness and this parasympathomimeticness occurs. fact3: The fact that the parodying Runyon does not happens and this roiling progressivism does not occurs is wrong. fact4: The mould does not occurs. fact5: If the echolocation and this interlinking kb occurs then the fact that the sorting does not happens is correct. fact6: If that the fact that this punishing Fitzgerald does not happens and the contralateralness does not occurs is false hold then the contralateralness happens. fact7: The assenting happens and this purple occurs. fact8: That undramaticness does not happens. fact9: The fact that this randomness and this non-Mendelianness occurs does not hold. fact10: This dieting does not happens. fact11: This roiling progressivism occurs if the fact that the parodying Runyon does not occurs and this roiling progressivism does not happens is false. fact12: That the defiling fanatism does not occurs and the coveting does not occurs does not hold. fact13: That narrowing cytogenetics happens. fact14: This romancing happens if the fact that the sirocco does not occurs and this romancing does not occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The clitoricness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That xerophile antiquates and is not Hebraical.

({D}{c} & ¬{B}{c})

fact1: The fact that that xerophile antiquates but the person is non-Hebraical does not hold if this silver is not non-Hebraical. fact2: This silver is not Hebraical if the fact that it either is not litigious or is an anencephaly or both does not hold. fact3: If that something is not litigious and/or it is an anencephaly is incorrect then it is non-Hebraical. fact4: If this silver is not a cosec and is not endogenic that filmmaker is not a wharf. fact5: If that something is not a kind of a cosec but this thing is a wharf is incorrect this thing is not a wharf. fact6: The fact that the fact that that xerophile antiquates and is Hebraical does not hold is correct. fact7: If that somebody is not a wharf hold the fact that that it is a stoichiometry and twinkles is right does not hold. fact8: That that filmmaker is not a kind of a cosec and is a kind of a wharf is incorrect if this silver is not endogenic. fact9: The fact that this silver is not litigious and/or is not an anencephaly is incorrect if that filmmaker twinkles. fact10: This silver is an anencephaly. fact11: If that this silver is a cosec but it is not a crookedness does not hold then it is not a cosec. fact12: That that that xerophile antiquates and is Hebraical does not hold hold if this silver is not Hebraical. fact13: If something is not Hebraical then it antiquates and it twinkles. fact14: That filmmaker does twinkle. fact15: Something is not Hebraical but this is a kind of a stoichiometry if this is not a kind of a wharf. fact16: This silver is pelagic. fact17: This silver is an anencephaly if that filmmaker twinkles. fact18: If the fact that that xerophile is Hebraical hold then that this silver is not an anencephaly or this thing does not antiquate or both is false. fact19: The fact that this silver is a cosec but it is not a kind of a crookedness does not hold if this silver is pelagic. fact20: If that filmmaker is not a wharf this teamster is not a wharf. fact21: If the fact that someone is not litigious and/or is not a kind of an anencephaly is incorrect then she/he is not Hebraical.

fact1: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: (¬{F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact5: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x fact6: ¬({D}{c} & {B}{c}) fact7: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) fact8: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬(¬{F}{a} & {E}{a}) fact9: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) fact10: {AB}{b} fact11: ¬({F}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact12: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({D}{c} & {B}{c}) fact13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) fact14: {A}{a} fact15: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) fact16: {H}{b} fact17: {A}{a} -> {AB}{b} fact18: {B}{c} -> ¬(¬{AB}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) fact19: {H}{b} -> ¬({F}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) fact20: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬{E}{hd} fact21: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

That xerophile antiquates and is not Hebraical.

({D}{c} & ¬{B}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that xerophile antiquates but the person is non-Hebraical does not hold if this silver is not non-Hebraical. fact2: This silver is not Hebraical if the fact that it either is not litigious or is an anencephaly or both does not hold. fact3: If that something is not litigious and/or it is an anencephaly is incorrect then it is non-Hebraical. fact4: If this silver is not a cosec and is not endogenic that filmmaker is not a wharf. fact5: If that something is not a kind of a cosec but this thing is a wharf is incorrect this thing is not a wharf. fact6: The fact that the fact that that xerophile antiquates and is Hebraical does not hold is correct. fact7: If that somebody is not a wharf hold the fact that that it is a stoichiometry and twinkles is right does not hold. fact8: That that filmmaker is not a kind of a cosec and is a kind of a wharf is incorrect if this silver is not endogenic. fact9: The fact that this silver is not litigious and/or is not an anencephaly is incorrect if that filmmaker twinkles. fact10: This silver is an anencephaly. fact11: If that this silver is a cosec but it is not a crookedness does not hold then it is not a cosec. fact12: That that that xerophile antiquates and is Hebraical does not hold hold if this silver is not Hebraical. fact13: If something is not Hebraical then it antiquates and it twinkles. fact14: That filmmaker does twinkle. fact15: Something is not Hebraical but this is a kind of a stoichiometry if this is not a kind of a wharf. fact16: This silver is pelagic. fact17: This silver is an anencephaly if that filmmaker twinkles. fact18: If the fact that that xerophile is Hebraical hold then that this silver is not an anencephaly or this thing does not antiquate or both is false. fact19: The fact that this silver is a cosec but it is not a kind of a crookedness does not hold if this silver is pelagic. fact20: If that filmmaker is not a wharf this teamster is not a wharf. fact21: If the fact that someone is not litigious and/or is not a kind of an anencephaly is incorrect then she/he is not Hebraical. ; $hypothesis$ = That xerophile antiquates and is not Hebraical. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact14 -> int1: That this silver is not litigious or it is not a kind of an anencephaly or both does not hold.; fact21 -> int2: If the fact that this silver is non-litigious and/or not an anencephaly is not right he/she is not Hebraical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This silver is not Hebraical.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cassiri is a neurobiology.

{A}{a}

fact1: The fact that this XXX does not unroll cystitis is correct. fact2: There exists no man such that it is anemometric and it does not slash angled. fact3: If the fact that Porfirio distributes but it does not unroll cystitis is wrong that cassiri is not a neurobiology. fact4: There is nothing such that this unrolls cystitis and is not a neurobiology. fact5: There exists no one such that it distributes and it does not unroll cystitis. fact6: If the fact that some person is not inflectional and/or that one is a kind of a misogyny does not hold that one is a neurobiology. fact7: Something is not a neurobiology but a misogyny if that is not inflectional. fact8: The fact that Porfirio unrolls cystitis and is not a kind of a neurobiology is false. fact9: The fact that Porfirio distributes and does unroll cystitis is wrong. fact10: If Porfirio unrolls cystitis then that cassiri is not a neurobiology. fact11: There is no man such that he/she distributes and unrolls cystitis. fact12: That orca is not a futuristics if the fact that that orca is a kind of non-multilingual a futuristics does not hold. fact13: That that Porfirio is a neurobiology but he does not unroll cystitis does not hold hold. fact14: This haricot does not unroll cystitis. fact15: The fact that either that cassiri is not inflectional or it is a misogyny or both is incorrect if that orca is not a futuristics. fact16: The fact that that cassiri unrolls cystitis but it is not a kind of a neurobiology is false.

fact1: ¬{AB}{el} fact2: (x): ¬({FH}x & ¬{IH}x) fact3: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact4: (x): ¬({AB}x & ¬{A}x) fact5: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{C}x v {B}x) -> {A}x fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x) fact8: ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) fact9: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact10: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} fact11: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact12: ¬(¬{F}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact13: ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact14: ¬{AB}{g} fact15: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v {B}{a}) fact16: ¬({AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

That imitation is not a neurobiology.

¬{A}{fc}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this XXX does not unroll cystitis is correct. fact2: There exists no man such that it is anemometric and it does not slash angled. fact3: If the fact that Porfirio distributes but it does not unroll cystitis is wrong that cassiri is not a neurobiology. fact4: There is nothing such that this unrolls cystitis and is not a neurobiology. fact5: There exists no one such that it distributes and it does not unroll cystitis. fact6: If the fact that some person is not inflectional and/or that one is a kind of a misogyny does not hold that one is a neurobiology. fact7: Something is not a neurobiology but a misogyny if that is not inflectional. fact8: The fact that Porfirio unrolls cystitis and is not a kind of a neurobiology is false. fact9: The fact that Porfirio distributes and does unroll cystitis is wrong. fact10: If Porfirio unrolls cystitis then that cassiri is not a neurobiology. fact11: There is no man such that he/she distributes and unrolls cystitis. fact12: That orca is not a futuristics if the fact that that orca is a kind of non-multilingual a futuristics does not hold. fact13: That that Porfirio is a neurobiology but he does not unroll cystitis does not hold hold. fact14: This haricot does not unroll cystitis. fact15: The fact that either that cassiri is not inflectional or it is a misogyny or both is incorrect if that orca is not a futuristics. fact16: The fact that that cassiri unrolls cystitis but it is not a kind of a neurobiology is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That cassiri is a neurobiology. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: That the fact that Porfirio distributes but it does not unroll cystitis is false is right.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The engrossing Hepaticae occurs.

{B}

fact1: Either that this outlasting happens or that this deathblow occurs or both is triggered by that that parsing does not occurs. fact2: The rosinessing K2 occurs. fact3: That that remarking Cabombaceae happens causes that the engrossing Hepaticae does not happens and that chronicness does not happens. fact4: That parsing does not occurs if that notthe glowing smallholding but that parsing occurs is wrong. fact5: That this bleat does not occurs yields that the civilizedness and this autogenousness happens. fact6: The spitter does not happens but the seigneury occurs. fact7: The fact that the glowing smallholding does not happens and that parsing happens is wrong if that noncivilizedness does not happens.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ({D} v {E}) fact2: {HG} fact3: {C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact4: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{F} fact5: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & {I}) fact6: (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact7: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F})

The fact that the engrossing Hepaticae does not happens is not false.

¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either that this outlasting happens or that this deathblow occurs or both is triggered by that that parsing does not occurs. fact2: The rosinessing K2 occurs. fact3: That that remarking Cabombaceae happens causes that the engrossing Hepaticae does not happens and that chronicness does not happens. fact4: That parsing does not occurs if that notthe glowing smallholding but that parsing occurs is wrong. fact5: That this bleat does not occurs yields that the civilizedness and this autogenousness happens. fact6: The spitter does not happens but the seigneury occurs. fact7: The fact that the glowing smallholding does not happens and that parsing happens is wrong if that noncivilizedness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The engrossing Hepaticae occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this truss is a Chaldean but it is not unreflected is wrong.

¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

fact1: Some person is not a uncleanliness if it is not acarpellous and/or it transects Eritrea. fact2: If the fact that something is not a uncleanliness is not wrong then it is a kind of a Chaldean that is not unreflected. fact3: The fact that something is a Chaldean but not unreflected is not correct if it is a uncleanliness. fact4: That satellite is not unreflected if this truss is not unreflected. fact5: If that this truss is not a kind of a Cytisus but it is a Ibert does not hold then this truss is a uncleanliness. fact6: The fact that that this truss is not a kind of a Cytisus but it is a kind of a Ibert is incorrect is right. fact7: If something is reflected that it is a kind of a uncleanliness that does not implicate radiculitis is not right.

fact1: (x): (¬{E}x v {D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact3: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{A}{jb} fact5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{FN}x)

That that satellite is a uncleanliness but it does not implicate radiculitis does not hold.

¬({B}{jb} & ¬{FN}{jb})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not a uncleanliness if it is not acarpellous and/or it transects Eritrea. fact2: If the fact that something is not a uncleanliness is not wrong then it is a kind of a Chaldean that is not unreflected. fact3: The fact that something is a Chaldean but not unreflected is not correct if it is a uncleanliness. fact4: That satellite is not unreflected if this truss is not unreflected. fact5: If that this truss is not a kind of a Cytisus but it is a Ibert does not hold then this truss is a uncleanliness. fact6: The fact that that this truss is not a kind of a Cytisus but it is a kind of a Ibert is incorrect is right. fact7: If something is reflected that it is a kind of a uncleanliness that does not implicate radiculitis is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this truss is a Chaldean but it is not unreflected is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: This truss is a uncleanliness.; fact3 -> int2: If this truss is a uncleanliness then the fact that this truss is a Chaldean but it is not unreflected is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this scauper profanes calorie and typesets hold.

({A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: Loren typesets and she/he is effectual. fact2: Some man that does not strengthen rockabilly is not a Larix and not pachydermal. fact3: This scauper profanes calorie. fact4: Something that litters servitude and is a Micrococcus is not alular. fact5: This scauper does typeset. fact6: That that flume is not qualitative hold. fact7: That flume is a Micrococcus if that flume grovels and is not a Pooecetes. fact8: The batsman is a Pauli and a antipode if that that flume is not alular is true. fact9: If this closet does not profane calorie then the fact that he typesets hold. fact10: that calorie profanes scauper. fact11: That flume litters servitude. fact12: If this daisy is a kind of a framing this scauper does not strengthen rockabilly. fact13: If that flume is not qualitative then that flume grovels but it is not a Pooecetes. fact14: If something is not pachydermal the fact that it profanes calorie and typesets is wrong.

fact1: ({B}{je} & {ED}{je}) fact2: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: (x): ({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{I}x fact5: {B}{a} fact6: ¬{N}{d} fact7: ({L}{d} & ¬{M}{d}) -> {J}{d} fact8: ¬{I}{d} -> ({G}{c} & {H}{c}) fact9: ¬{A}{hg} -> {B}{hg} fact10: {AA}{aa} fact11: {K}{d} fact12: {F}{b} -> ¬{E}{a} fact13: ¬{N}{d} -> ({L}{d} & ¬{M}{d}) fact14: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x)

This closet typesets.

{B}{hg}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Loren typesets and she/he is effectual. fact2: Some man that does not strengthen rockabilly is not a Larix and not pachydermal. fact3: This scauper profanes calorie. fact4: Something that litters servitude and is a Micrococcus is not alular. fact5: This scauper does typeset. fact6: That that flume is not qualitative hold. fact7: That flume is a Micrococcus if that flume grovels and is not a Pooecetes. fact8: The batsman is a Pauli and a antipode if that that flume is not alular is true. fact9: If this closet does not profane calorie then the fact that he typesets hold. fact10: that calorie profanes scauper. fact11: That flume litters servitude. fact12: If this daisy is a kind of a framing this scauper does not strengthen rockabilly. fact13: If that flume is not qualitative then that flume grovels but it is not a Pooecetes. fact14: If something is not pachydermal the fact that it profanes calorie and typesets is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That this scauper profanes calorie and typesets hold. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That despite occurs.

{C}

fact1: This thyroid occurs. fact2: This gazumping proctocele happens. fact3: The fraternisation occurs. fact4: This thyroid does not happens if the fact that that both this uncrowdedness and the non-repulsiveness happens is wrong hold. fact5: If this thyroid does not happens then that despite and this gazumping proctocele occurs. fact6: This easiness and the reformulating spectre happens. fact7: If this thyroid does not happens then this cracked does not occurs but this gazumping proctocele happens. fact8: The music occurs.

fact1: {B} fact2: {A} fact3: {IR} fact4: ¬({E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact6: ({GD} & {DG}) fact7: ¬{B} -> (¬{GB} & {A}) fact8: {EQ}

That despite occurs.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This thyroid occurs. fact2: This gazumping proctocele happens. fact3: The fraternisation occurs. fact4: This thyroid does not happens if the fact that that both this uncrowdedness and the non-repulsiveness happens is wrong hold. fact5: If this thyroid does not happens then that despite and this gazumping proctocele occurs. fact6: This easiness and the reformulating spectre happens. fact7: If this thyroid does not happens then this cracked does not occurs but this gazumping proctocele happens. fact8: The music occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That despite occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This honoring does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That this honoring does not occurs is brought about by that that rulership occurs and that compromising specialness happens. fact2: This colorimetricness happens. fact3: This permeating Hercules and that rulership occurs if this colorimetricness does not occurs. fact4: That fenestration happens and that compromising specialness happens. fact5: If the fact that that spastic happens and this colorimetricness occurs is false this colorimetricness does not occurs. fact6: That compromising specialness occurs and/or this honoring does not happens if that fenestration occurs. fact7: That that compromising specialness occurs and/or that this honoring does not happens brings about that that crashing albinism happens. fact8: That rulership occurs and this colorimetricness occurs. fact9: That this throttling pataca and that fenestration occurs is brought about by that this chronologicalness does not happens. fact10: This chronologicalness does not happens if that that the inhumation occurs and this chronologicalness happens is right is wrong.

fact1: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact2: {B} fact3: ¬{B} -> ({DJ} & {A}) fact4: ({E} & {C}) fact5: ¬({H} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact6: {E} -> ({C} v ¬{D}) fact7: ({C} v ¬{D}) -> {AQ} fact8: ({A} & {B}) fact9: ¬{I} -> ({F} & {E}) fact10: ¬({J} & {I}) -> ¬{I}

Both that crashing albinism and this permeating Hercules occurs.

({AQ} & {DJ})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this honoring does not occurs is brought about by that that rulership occurs and that compromising specialness happens. fact2: This colorimetricness happens. fact3: This permeating Hercules and that rulership occurs if this colorimetricness does not occurs. fact4: That fenestration happens and that compromising specialness happens. fact5: If the fact that that spastic happens and this colorimetricness occurs is false this colorimetricness does not occurs. fact6: That compromising specialness occurs and/or this honoring does not happens if that fenestration occurs. fact7: That that compromising specialness occurs and/or that this honoring does not happens brings about that that crashing albinism happens. fact8: That rulership occurs and this colorimetricness occurs. fact9: That this throttling pataca and that fenestration occurs is brought about by that this chronologicalness does not happens. fact10: This chronologicalness does not happens if that that the inhumation occurs and this chronologicalness happens is right is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This honoring does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: That rulership happens.; fact4 -> int2: That that compromising specialness happens hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that rulership and that compromising specialness happens.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That madwoman is not porous.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Everything is not an imbalance and it is not a incurability. fact2: The fact that that madwoman is not an imbalance and this one is not a incurability is wrong if this one is porous.

fact1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact2: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is not an imbalance and it is not a incurability. fact2: The fact that that madwoman is not an imbalance and this one is not a incurability is wrong if this one is porous. ; $hypothesis$ = That madwoman is not porous. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that madwoman is porous.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: That that madwoman is not an imbalance and the thing is not a incurability is wrong.; fact1 -> int2: That madwoman is both not an imbalance and not a incurability.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That peopling Semitic does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: That consulting Arjuna and that recusing Oregon happens. fact2: That that consulting Arjuna does not happens and that peopling Semitic happens is incorrect if that recusing Oregon does not happens. fact3: That that recusing Oregon does not happens is brought about by that that flagging enviousness does not happens. fact4: That precedentedness does not happens and that acting occurs if that bractedness occurs. fact5: That that that acting occurs and that precedentedness occurs is brought about by this non-bractedness is not false. fact6: If that convoy occurs then this non-undesignedness and that bractedness occurs. fact7: If that recusing Oregon happens then that peopling Semitic occurs. fact8: The fact that the crunch does not happens and that flagging enviousness happens is wrong if that precedentedness happens. fact9: If the fact that notthe crunch but that flagging enviousness occurs is wrong then that peopling Semitic does not occurs. fact10: That parcellation happens if that consulting Arjuna happens.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{A} & {C}) fact3: ¬{D} -> ¬{B} fact4: {H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact5: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) fact6: {J} -> (¬{I} & {H}) fact7: {B} -> {C} fact8: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {D}) fact9: ¬(¬{E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} fact10: {A} -> {DQ}

That peopling Semitic does not occurs.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That consulting Arjuna and that recusing Oregon happens. fact2: That that consulting Arjuna does not happens and that peopling Semitic happens is incorrect if that recusing Oregon does not happens. fact3: That that recusing Oregon does not happens is brought about by that that flagging enviousness does not happens. fact4: That precedentedness does not happens and that acting occurs if that bractedness occurs. fact5: That that that acting occurs and that precedentedness occurs is brought about by this non-bractedness is not false. fact6: If that convoy occurs then this non-undesignedness and that bractedness occurs. fact7: If that recusing Oregon happens then that peopling Semitic occurs. fact8: The fact that the crunch does not happens and that flagging enviousness happens is wrong if that precedentedness happens. fact9: If the fact that notthe crunch but that flagging enviousness occurs is wrong then that peopling Semitic does not occurs. fact10: That parcellation happens if that consulting Arjuna happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That peopling Semitic does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That recusing Oregon occurs.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this parget is a logging if Jalen is a kind of a Agra is wrong.

¬({A}{a} -> {C}{c})

fact1: If this prohibitionist is a Agra then Jalen noises dysosmia. fact2: Jalen is a logging. fact3: If Jalen is a logging this parget is a Agra. fact4: This parget noises dysosmia if this prohibitionist is a logging. fact5: Jalen is pure. fact6: Jalen is a logging if that this parget is a kind of a Agra is true. fact7: Jalen noises dysosmia. fact8: This parget is saleable. fact9: This prohibitionist noises dysosmia if Jalen is a kind of a Agra. fact10: This prohibitionist is a logging. fact11: This parget noises dysosmia. fact12: The AS noises dysosmia. fact13: This prohibitionist is a trample. fact14: This parget is a kind of a Tzara. fact15: If the succession is a Agra then this prohibitionist noises dysosmia. fact16: This prohibitionist is a logging if this parget noises dysosmia. fact17: This prohibitionist is a Agra if Jalen noises dysosmia. fact18: This prohibitionist is a Agra. fact19: This parget is a logging if this prohibitionist noises dysosmia. fact20: If this parget noises dysosmia Jalen is a logging.

fact1: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact2: {C}{a} fact3: {C}{a} -> {A}{c} fact4: {C}{b} -> {B}{c} fact5: {R}{a} fact6: {A}{c} -> {C}{a} fact7: {B}{a} fact8: {DB}{c} fact9: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact10: {C}{b} fact11: {B}{c} fact12: {B}{m} fact13: {EO}{b} fact14: {E}{c} fact15: {A}{gh} -> {B}{b} fact16: {B}{c} -> {C}{b} fact17: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact18: {A}{b} fact19: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} fact20: {B}{c} -> {C}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this prohibitionist is a Agra then Jalen noises dysosmia. fact2: Jalen is a logging. fact3: If Jalen is a logging this parget is a Agra. fact4: This parget noises dysosmia if this prohibitionist is a logging. fact5: Jalen is pure. fact6: Jalen is a logging if that this parget is a kind of a Agra is true. fact7: Jalen noises dysosmia. fact8: This parget is saleable. fact9: This prohibitionist noises dysosmia if Jalen is a kind of a Agra. fact10: This prohibitionist is a logging. fact11: This parget noises dysosmia. fact12: The AS noises dysosmia. fact13: This prohibitionist is a trample. fact14: This parget is a kind of a Tzara. fact15: If the succession is a Agra then this prohibitionist noises dysosmia. fact16: This prohibitionist is a logging if this parget noises dysosmia. fact17: This prohibitionist is a Agra if Jalen noises dysosmia. fact18: This prohibitionist is a Agra. fact19: This parget is a logging if this prohibitionist noises dysosmia. fact20: If this parget noises dysosmia Jalen is a logging. ; $hypothesis$ = That this parget is a logging if Jalen is a kind of a Agra is wrong. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that Jalen is a kind of a Agra.; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: This prohibitionist noises dysosmia.; int1 & fact19 -> int2: This parget is a logging.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This barong is a trojan and the person demists raised.

({B}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: That nucleoside is not analytical and/or the person is not directional if this divot does not apply. fact2: This barong is a trojan if that nucleoside is not analytical. fact3: This barong is directional. fact4: If that nucleoside is not directional this barong is a trojan. fact5: This barong does repeat decametre if this skateboard is a gigacycle. fact6: This divot earths cordoba. fact7: If this divot is not directional this lepidopteron is not directional. fact8: If that nucleoside catholicizes fecundity then this divot does catholicizes fecundity. fact9: This barong repeats decametre and is not a gigacycle if this divot does not lionise Antigone. fact10: Something is discontent if that this does earth cordoba is correct. fact11: If something does not apply then that it is a trojan and it demists raised is incorrect. fact12: Somebody demists raised if the fact that it repeats decametre is not incorrect. fact13: This divot is not directional or is not a trojan or both if this divot does apply. fact14: If something is a kind of discontent thing that catholicizes fecundity then it does not lionise Antigone. fact15: This skateboard is a gigacycle. fact16: If some person that repeats decametre is not a gigacycle the one does not apply.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) fact2: ¬{AA}{b} -> {B}{c} fact3: {AB}{c} fact4: ¬{AB}{b} -> {B}{c} fact5: {E}{d} -> {D}{c} fact6: {I}{a} fact7: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{AB}{fl} fact8: {H}{b} -> {H}{a} fact9: ¬{F}{a} -> ({D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) fact10: (x): {I}x -> {G}x fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & {C}x) fact12: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact13: {A}{a} -> (¬{AB}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact14: (x): ({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact15: {E}{d} fact16: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x

This lepidopteron is not directional.

¬{AB}{fl}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That nucleoside is not analytical and/or the person is not directional if this divot does not apply. fact2: This barong is a trojan if that nucleoside is not analytical. fact3: This barong is directional. fact4: If that nucleoside is not directional this barong is a trojan. fact5: This barong does repeat decametre if this skateboard is a gigacycle. fact6: This divot earths cordoba. fact7: If this divot is not directional this lepidopteron is not directional. fact8: If that nucleoside catholicizes fecundity then this divot does catholicizes fecundity. fact9: This barong repeats decametre and is not a gigacycle if this divot does not lionise Antigone. fact10: Something is discontent if that this does earth cordoba is correct. fact11: If something does not apply then that it is a trojan and it demists raised is incorrect. fact12: Somebody demists raised if the fact that it repeats decametre is not incorrect. fact13: This divot is not directional or is not a trojan or both if this divot does apply. fact14: If something is a kind of discontent thing that catholicizes fecundity then it does not lionise Antigone. fact15: This skateboard is a gigacycle. fact16: If some person that repeats decametre is not a gigacycle the one does not apply. ; $hypothesis$ = This barong is a trojan and the person demists raised. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that that both this inaugural and that non-dimorphousness occurs does not hold is right.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This expatiation happens and this mystic happens if that this Funk does not happens is not wrong. fact2: The fact that this word does not occurs and this mystic occurs is false. fact3: The fact that this word but notthat stating happens is incorrect if this mystic occurs. fact4: If this word occurs the fact that this inaugural occurs and that dimorphousness does not occurs is false. fact5: If the fact that this word does not happens and this mystic happens is false that stating happens. fact6: If that this word happens and that stating does not occurs is wrong then this word does not occurs. fact7: If this word does not occurs then that the Lying does not happens and that rant happens is incorrect. fact8: That stating does not happens if the fact that this inaugural and that non-dimorphousness occurs is incorrect. fact9: That this mystic does not happens and this expatiation does not occurs is brought about by that this Funk does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) fact2: ¬(¬{A} & {C}) fact3: {C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) fact4: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact5: ¬(¬{A} & {C}) -> {B} fact6: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact7: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{GI} & {BI}) fact8: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact9: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D})

Let's assume that that that both this inaugural and that non-dimorphousness occurs does not hold is right.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This expatiation happens and this mystic happens if that this Funk does not happens is not wrong. fact2: The fact that this word does not occurs and this mystic occurs is false. fact3: The fact that this word but notthat stating happens is incorrect if this mystic occurs. fact4: If this word occurs the fact that this inaugural occurs and that dimorphousness does not occurs is false. fact5: If the fact that this word does not happens and this mystic happens is false that stating happens. fact6: If that this word happens and that stating does not occurs is wrong then this word does not occurs. fact7: If this word does not occurs then that the Lying does not happens and that rant happens is incorrect. fact8: That stating does not happens if the fact that this inaugural and that non-dimorphousness occurs is incorrect. fact9: That this mystic does not happens and this expatiation does not occurs is brought about by that this Funk does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that both this inaugural and that non-dimorphousness occurs does not hold is right. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that both this inaugural and that non-dimorphousness occurs does not hold is right.; fact8 & assump1 -> int1: That stating does not happens.; fact5 & fact2 -> int2: That stating occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That scanty is not gilled.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That lenitive is not non-quartzose if that that lenitive counsels but it does not riot hydrology is false. fact2: If something is not a Zizania then that it does misapprehend Robinia and it is gilled does not hold. fact3: If the fact that something accumulates Myxinoidei and it is a Zizania is wrong then it is not a Zizania. fact4: Somebody is dioecian if the fact that it plicates spavin and is not a swivet is false. fact5: If that scanty is a Antido then that scanty is gilled. fact6: If the fact that something does misapprehend Robinia and that thing is gilled is not correct that thing is not gilled. fact7: This arame is a Zizania. fact8: The fact that this arame is a kind of a Platymiscium but it is not a Antidoes not hold if that that scanty is a kind of a Zizania is true. fact9: If this arame is a Zizania that that scanty is a Platymiscium and it is a Antido is not correct. fact10: If the fact that this arame candies lucidness and is not a Zizania is wrong then that this arame does counsel is correct. fact11: If some person is a kind of a Antido she/he is gilled. fact12: The mestranol is gilled. fact13: This arame is a Platymiscium. fact14: If that this arame is a Zizania is correct that that scanty is a Platymiscium but it is not a Antido is wrong. fact15: Somebody is a Antido if it is a Zizania. fact16: That Meg is a Zizania is correct. fact17: If that some person is a Platymiscium but he is not a Antidoes not hold he is gilled. fact18: The horticulturist is a Antido.

fact1: ¬({HO}{ai} & ¬{HE}{ai}) -> {IM}{ai} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) fact3: (x): ¬({D}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact4: (x): ¬({FO}x & ¬{BK}x) -> {IB}x fact5: {AB}{b} -> {B}{b} fact6: (x): ¬({C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: {A}{a} fact8: {A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact9: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact10: ¬({HG}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {HO}{a} fact11: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x fact12: {B}{jj} fact13: {AA}{a} fact14: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact15: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x fact16: {A}{bt} fact17: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact18: {AB}{du}

That scanty is not gilled.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lenitive is not non-quartzose if that that lenitive counsels but it does not riot hydrology is false. fact2: If something is not a Zizania then that it does misapprehend Robinia and it is gilled does not hold. fact3: If the fact that something accumulates Myxinoidei and it is a Zizania is wrong then it is not a Zizania. fact4: Somebody is dioecian if the fact that it plicates spavin and is not a swivet is false. fact5: If that scanty is a Antido then that scanty is gilled. fact6: If the fact that something does misapprehend Robinia and that thing is gilled is not correct that thing is not gilled. fact7: This arame is a Zizania. fact8: The fact that this arame is a kind of a Platymiscium but it is not a Antidoes not hold if that that scanty is a kind of a Zizania is true. fact9: If this arame is a Zizania that that scanty is a Platymiscium and it is a Antido is not correct. fact10: If the fact that this arame candies lucidness and is not a Zizania is wrong then that this arame does counsel is correct. fact11: If some person is a kind of a Antido she/he is gilled. fact12: The mestranol is gilled. fact13: This arame is a Platymiscium. fact14: If that this arame is a Zizania is correct that that scanty is a Platymiscium but it is not a Antido is wrong. fact15: Somebody is a Antido if it is a Zizania. fact16: That Meg is a Zizania is correct. fact17: If that some person is a Platymiscium but he is not a Antidoes not hold he is gilled. fact18: The horticulturist is a Antido. ; $hypothesis$ = That scanty is not gilled. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact7 -> int1: The fact that that scanty is a Platymiscium but this thing is not a Antidoes not hold.; fact17 -> int2: If the fact that that scanty is a Platymiscium and not a Antidoes not hold then that that scanty is gilled hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The dibber is arteriolar.

{A}{a}

fact1: That that maniac is not non-arteriolar is right. fact2: If somebody is non-securer then it is arteriolar and it is a kind of a electrochemistry. fact3: Something that is not thoughtful is not non-altitudinal and is not a Dicamptodontidae. fact4: If this figurehead is not hemopoietic that it is unarmoured and quartan is false. fact5: If that some man is unarmoured man that is quartan does not hold she/he is not thoughtful. fact6: Some person is not securer if this one is not a Dicamptodontidae. fact7: This figurehead is not hemopoietic if this figurehead is unappendaged or this is a kind of a Natrix or both. fact8: This figurehead is unappendaged or it is a Natrix or both.

fact1: {A}{id} fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & ¬{D}x) fact4: ¬{I}{hr} -> ¬({H}{hr} & {G}{hr}) fact5: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x fact6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x fact7: ({K}{hr} v {J}{hr}) -> ¬{I}{hr} fact8: ({K}{hr} v {J}{hr})

This figurehead is arteriolar.

{A}{hr}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That that maniac is not non-arteriolar is right. fact2: If somebody is non-securer then it is arteriolar and it is a kind of a electrochemistry. fact3: Something that is not thoughtful is not non-altitudinal and is not a Dicamptodontidae. fact4: If this figurehead is not hemopoietic that it is unarmoured and quartan is false. fact5: If that some man is unarmoured man that is quartan does not hold she/he is not thoughtful. fact6: Some person is not securer if this one is not a Dicamptodontidae. fact7: This figurehead is not hemopoietic if this figurehead is unappendaged or this is a kind of a Natrix or both. fact8: This figurehead is unappendaged or it is a Natrix or both. ; $hypothesis$ = The dibber is arteriolar. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__