Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

The fact that that if this jeopardy is an alphabet that hemoglobin does not flight drowsiness is true does not hold.

¬({B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b})

fact1: That lemonade is not Grenadian. fact2: That something is not coordinative is not false if the thing is non-Grenadian. fact3: If some person is not a Rypticus then it is a soviet that surveys degeneracy. fact4: The fact that that transplanter is not a kind of an alphabet if this jeopardy is both an alphabet and not a Hydrophyllum is true. fact5: Some person is an alphabet but she/he is not a kind of a Hydrophyllum if she/he is stearic. fact6: That hemoglobin does not flight drowsiness if this jeopardy does paralyze diastasis and is a kind of an alphabet. fact7: If that peavy is not a Ostracoda and it is non-stearic the fact that that hemoglobin is non-stearic is right. fact8: That peavy is not a Ostracoda and that is not stearic if that lemonade is not inquisitorial. fact9: If that hemoglobin paralyzes diastasis then this jeopardy does not flight drowsiness. fact10: The fact that that hemoglobin is a kind of a sufficiency is right. fact11: That hemoglobin is not an alphabet if this jeopardy paralyzes diastasis and flights drowsiness. fact12: that diastasis paralyzes jeopardy. fact13: This biplane does not paralyze diastasis if the fact that this jeopardy does paralyze diastasis and/or this thing is not an alphabet is wrong. fact14: If that hemoglobin is not non-stearic then the fact that this jeopardy is non-stearic is right. fact15: If this jeopardy is an alphabet that does flight drowsiness that hemoglobin does not paralyze diastasis. fact16: That hemoglobin paralyzes diastasis. fact17: This jeopardy is a kind of a sufficiency. fact18: This jeopardy paralyzes diastasis. fact19: Something paralyzes diastasis if either it flights drowsiness or it is not an alphabet or both. fact20: If something that is a soviet surveys degeneracy then that thing is not inquisitorial. fact21: The fact that that that lemonade is a kind of a Rypticus that is a lipoidaemia does not hold hold if that lemonade is not coordinative. fact22: That lemonade is not a Rypticus if the fact that that lemonade is a Rypticus and a lipoidaemia does not hold.

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

This biplane does not paralyze diastasis.

¬{A}{et}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lemonade is not Grenadian. fact2: That something is not coordinative is not false if the thing is non-Grenadian. fact3: If some person is not a Rypticus then it is a soviet that surveys degeneracy. fact4: The fact that that transplanter is not a kind of an alphabet if this jeopardy is both an alphabet and not a Hydrophyllum is true. fact5: Some person is an alphabet but she/he is not a kind of a Hydrophyllum if she/he is stearic. fact6: That hemoglobin does not flight drowsiness if this jeopardy does paralyze diastasis and is a kind of an alphabet. fact7: If that peavy is not a Ostracoda and it is non-stearic the fact that that hemoglobin is non-stearic is right. fact8: That peavy is not a Ostracoda and that is not stearic if that lemonade is not inquisitorial. fact9: If that hemoglobin paralyzes diastasis then this jeopardy does not flight drowsiness. fact10: The fact that that hemoglobin is a kind of a sufficiency is right. fact11: That hemoglobin is not an alphabet if this jeopardy paralyzes diastasis and flights drowsiness. fact12: that diastasis paralyzes jeopardy. fact13: This biplane does not paralyze diastasis if the fact that this jeopardy does paralyze diastasis and/or this thing is not an alphabet is wrong. fact14: If that hemoglobin is not non-stearic then the fact that this jeopardy is non-stearic is right. fact15: If this jeopardy is an alphabet that does flight drowsiness that hemoglobin does not paralyze diastasis. fact16: That hemoglobin paralyzes diastasis. fact17: This jeopardy is a kind of a sufficiency. fact18: This jeopardy paralyzes diastasis. fact19: Something paralyzes diastasis if either it flights drowsiness or it is not an alphabet or both. fact20: If something that is a soviet surveys degeneracy then that thing is not inquisitorial. fact21: The fact that that that lemonade is a kind of a Rypticus that is a lipoidaemia does not hold hold if that lemonade is not coordinative. fact22: That lemonade is not a Rypticus if the fact that that lemonade is a Rypticus and a lipoidaemia does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that if this jeopardy is an alphabet that hemoglobin does not flight drowsiness is true does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this jeopardy is an alphabet.; fact18 & assump1 -> int1: This jeopardy paralyzes diastasis and is a kind of an alphabet.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: That hemoglobin does not flight drowsiness.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That guppy is Dostoyevskian and lures dodecahedron.

({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: If that guppy is a penny that that guppy is Dostoyevskian hold. fact2: That that guppy is Dostoyevskian and lures dodecahedron is wrong if that guppy is not a penny. fact3: That that guppy is both a Woodbury and a Beowulf is incorrect. fact4: If that guppy is not a mixed then that that thing bechances Calycanthus and lures dodecahedron is false. fact5: That guppy is not a kind of a penny. fact6: The fact that that whatchamacallit does encourage and is Dostoyevskian does not hold.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {AA}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: ¬({IG}{a} & {CJ}{a}) fact4: ¬{M}{a} -> ¬({GS}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact5: ¬{A}{a} fact6: ¬({ET}{g} & {AA}{g})

That guppy is Dostoyevskian and lures dodecahedron.

({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that guppy is a penny that that guppy is Dostoyevskian hold. fact2: That that guppy is Dostoyevskian and lures dodecahedron is wrong if that guppy is not a penny. fact3: That that guppy is both a Woodbury and a Beowulf is incorrect. fact4: If that guppy is not a mixed then that that thing bechances Calycanthus and lures dodecahedron is false. fact5: That guppy is not a kind of a penny. fact6: The fact that that whatchamacallit does encourage and is Dostoyevskian does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That guppy is Dostoyevskian and lures dodecahedron. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That if that alphabeticness does not occurs this measure happens is incorrect.

¬(¬{B} -> {C})

fact1: This aerophilicness results in this capitalisticness. fact2: The fact that the ferniness happens hold if the stoop does not occurs. fact3: This backdown does not occurs. fact4: If the producing Aragon happens the bounds happens. fact5: This non-fernyness brings about the cyclicalness. fact6: If notthis backdown but that alphabeticness occurs then this measure occurs. fact7: That this backdown does not happens and that alphabeticness does not happens yields that this measure occurs. fact8: This clogging is caused by that the unstagedness does not happens and the stoop does not occurs.

fact1: {AP} -> {JE} fact2: ¬{DL} -> {BK} fact3: ¬{A} fact4: {DI} -> {EQ} fact5: ¬{BK} -> {GA} fact6: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {C} fact7: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} fact8: (¬{AJ} & ¬{DL}) -> {AS}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This aerophilicness results in this capitalisticness. fact2: The fact that the ferniness happens hold if the stoop does not occurs. fact3: This backdown does not occurs. fact4: If the producing Aragon happens the bounds happens. fact5: This non-fernyness brings about the cyclicalness. fact6: If notthis backdown but that alphabeticness occurs then this measure occurs. fact7: That this backdown does not happens and that alphabeticness does not happens yields that this measure occurs. fact8: This clogging is caused by that the unstagedness does not happens and the stoop does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That if that alphabeticness does not occurs this measure happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that alphabeticness does not occurs.; fact3 & assump1 -> int1: This backdown does not occurs and that alphabeticness does not happens.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: This measure happens.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Doomsday but notthis welshing occurs.

({E} & ¬{D})

fact1: That Panamanian occurs. fact2: That that raging does not happens causes that that paramedical does not happens and that exalting happens. fact3: That that paramedical happens and that exalting happens is incorrect if this welshing does not happens. fact4: If this syndicating Conopodium happens then that road happens and that focalness does not happens. fact5: If that paramedical does not occurs then that overheadness occurs and that Panamanian happens. fact6: If the fact that both that non-indirectness and that roleplayinging provencal happens does not hold this syndicating Conopodium occurs. fact7: The fact that the fact that that colourizing Zacharias does not happens but that raging occurs is not wrong does not hold if that lockage happens. fact8: That raging does not happens if that notthat colourizing Zacharias but that raging happens is wrong. fact9: That the fact that that Doomsday happens but this welshing does not happens hold is false if that Panamanian does not happens. fact10: If the fact that that raging happens and that Doomsday happens is false then this welshing does not happens. fact11: That Doomsday occurs but this welshing does not happens if that exalting does not occurs. fact12: If that focalness does not happens that lockage happens and this alienation occurs. fact13: That paramedical happens. fact14: That exalting does not happens if both that Panamanian and that paramedical occurs.

fact1: {A} fact2: ¬{F} -> (¬{B} & {C}) fact3: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact4: {L} -> ({K} & ¬{J}) fact5: ¬{B} -> ({CB} & {A}) fact6: ¬(¬{N} & {M}) -> {L} fact7: {H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F}) fact8: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{F} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬({E} & ¬{D}) fact10: ¬({F} & {E}) -> ¬{D} fact11: ¬{C} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) fact12: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact13: {B} fact14: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C}

That overheadness occurs.

{CB}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Panamanian occurs. fact2: That that raging does not happens causes that that paramedical does not happens and that exalting happens. fact3: That that paramedical happens and that exalting happens is incorrect if this welshing does not happens. fact4: If this syndicating Conopodium happens then that road happens and that focalness does not happens. fact5: If that paramedical does not occurs then that overheadness occurs and that Panamanian happens. fact6: If the fact that both that non-indirectness and that roleplayinging provencal happens does not hold this syndicating Conopodium occurs. fact7: The fact that the fact that that colourizing Zacharias does not happens but that raging occurs is not wrong does not hold if that lockage happens. fact8: That raging does not happens if that notthat colourizing Zacharias but that raging happens is wrong. fact9: That the fact that that Doomsday happens but this welshing does not happens hold is false if that Panamanian does not happens. fact10: If the fact that that raging happens and that Doomsday happens is false then this welshing does not happens. fact11: That Doomsday occurs but this welshing does not happens if that exalting does not occurs. fact12: If that focalness does not happens that lockage happens and this alienation occurs. fact13: That paramedical happens. fact14: That exalting does not happens if both that Panamanian and that paramedical occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That Doomsday but notthis welshing occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact13 -> int1: Both that Panamanian and that paramedical occurs.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That exalting does not happens.; int2 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Danielle is not unchaste.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: That that aphakic deserves bourgeoisie and does classify laudableness is false if that chickeree does not realize overabundance. fact2: That Anchorage is unchaste. fact3: That Anchorage accuses overweight. fact4: If the fact that some person is not allantoic and it does not squawk Braun is wrong it squawk Braun. fact5: If the fact that this organist puzzles Sawan and is not unchaste is incorrect then that Anchorage is unchaste. fact6: That somebody accuses overweight and is a Marmara is incorrect if that that person is not a kind of an incredulity is true. fact7: Something is unchaste and accuses overweight if it does not puzzle Sawan. fact8: The fact that something puzzles Sawan but it is not unchaste does not hold if that it does not accuse overweight hold. fact9: Something is not a Marmara if it accuses overweight and puzzles Sawan. fact10: this overweight accuses Anchorage. fact11: Danielle is not unchaste if that Anchorage is not a Marmara. fact12: If the fact that someone does not bellow M.M. is true then the fact that this one is not allantoic and does not squawk Braun is not correct. fact13: If Danielle is not chaste that Anchorage is chaste. fact14: That Anchorage puzzles Sawan. fact15: If the fact that something deserves bourgeoisie and it classifies laudableness does not hold it is not a kind of an incredulity. fact16: Something does not realize overabundance if the fact that it falters tonsured and it does not tyrannize mummery does not hold. fact17: This organist does not accuse overweight if that that aphakic accuse overweight and that one is a Marmara is wrong. fact18: the Sawan puzzles Anchorage. fact19: If this bluff squawks Braun then that that chickeree falters tonsured and does not tyrannize mummery is wrong. fact20: Every man does not bellow M.M. fact21: Some person does not puzzle Sawan if he is not a Marmara and is not a kind of an incredulity.

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

That Anchorage is unchaste.

{D}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that aphakic deserves bourgeoisie and does classify laudableness is false if that chickeree does not realize overabundance. fact2: That Anchorage is unchaste. fact3: That Anchorage accuses overweight. fact4: If the fact that some person is not allantoic and it does not squawk Braun is wrong it squawk Braun. fact5: If the fact that this organist puzzles Sawan and is not unchaste is incorrect then that Anchorage is unchaste. fact6: That somebody accuses overweight and is a Marmara is incorrect if that that person is not a kind of an incredulity is true. fact7: Something is unchaste and accuses overweight if it does not puzzle Sawan. fact8: The fact that something puzzles Sawan but it is not unchaste does not hold if that it does not accuse overweight hold. fact9: Something is not a Marmara if it accuses overweight and puzzles Sawan. fact10: this overweight accuses Anchorage. fact11: Danielle is not unchaste if that Anchorage is not a Marmara. fact12: If the fact that someone does not bellow M.M. is true then the fact that this one is not allantoic and does not squawk Braun is not correct. fact13: If Danielle is not chaste that Anchorage is chaste. fact14: That Anchorage puzzles Sawan. fact15: If the fact that something deserves bourgeoisie and it classifies laudableness does not hold it is not a kind of an incredulity. fact16: Something does not realize overabundance if the fact that it falters tonsured and it does not tyrannize mummery does not hold. fact17: This organist does not accuse overweight if that that aphakic accuse overweight and that one is a Marmara is wrong. fact18: the Sawan puzzles Anchorage. fact19: If this bluff squawks Braun then that that chickeree falters tonsured and does not tyrannize mummery is wrong. fact20: Every man does not bellow M.M. fact21: Some person does not puzzle Sawan if he is not a Marmara and is not a kind of an incredulity. ; $hypothesis$ = Danielle is not unchaste. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact14 -> int1: That Anchorage does accuse overweight and this thing does puzzle Sawan.; fact9 -> int2: That Anchorage is not a Marmara if it accuses overweight and it puzzles Sawan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That Anchorage is not a Marmara.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That pottery does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: If that this Colombian does not happens is true then both that pottery and this non-Linnaeanness occurs. fact2: This equitableness occurs. fact3: If this bibliothecarialness occurs or the narcolepticness occurs or both then this piloting does not occurs. fact4: If the fact that notthe sideshow but this neglecting Himantopus occurs does not hold this Colombian does not happens. fact5: This ensuring Caryophyllaceae does not occurs. fact6: This transitivising occurs and/or the dispensing Cladonia occurs. fact7: That that Linnaeanness occurs is correct.

fact1: ¬{B} -> ({C} & ¬{A}) fact2: {DA} fact3: ({IS} v {EE}) -> ¬{DN} fact4: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{DH} fact6: ({HE} v {EF}) fact7: {A}

That pottery happens.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this Colombian does not happens is true then both that pottery and this non-Linnaeanness occurs. fact2: This equitableness occurs. fact3: If this bibliothecarialness occurs or the narcolepticness occurs or both then this piloting does not occurs. fact4: If the fact that notthe sideshow but this neglecting Himantopus occurs does not hold this Colombian does not happens. fact5: This ensuring Caryophyllaceae does not occurs. fact6: This transitivising occurs and/or the dispensing Cladonia occurs. fact7: That that Linnaeanness occurs is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That pottery does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That intangible happens.

{D}

fact1: This chaplainship does not happens if that moo does not occurs and that insularness occurs. fact2: That this vitrectomy does not occurs but this broiling occurs if the fact that this despising Paronychia occurs is correct is right. fact3: The stumbling does not happens. fact4: If that irreparableness happens that moo does not occurs. fact5: This craniotomy happens and this grumbling happens. fact6: If the belt does not occurs that that throne does not occurs but this carting happens does not hold. fact7: This titling does not happens if that this non-citrousness and the souredness occurs is incorrect. fact8: If this titling does not happens then that irreparableness happens or that wrinkliness occurs or both. fact9: If the stumbling does not happens the fact that both this non-citrousness and this non-unsouredness occurs is incorrect. fact10: If this grumbling does not happens then that intangible and this craniotomy happens. fact11: If that happenstance happens then that insularness occurs. fact12: That this grumbling happens and that billing heptagon happens prevents that intangible. fact13: If the fact that that throne does not occurs but this carting happens does not hold then this garotting Cocytus does not occurs. fact14: That that wrinkliness occurs leads to that that moo does not happens. fact15: If that this grumbling does not happens and this craniotomy does not happens is not correct that actinomycoticness does not happens. fact16: This fledging dogwatch but notthis commonness occurs if that this chaplainship does not happens is true. fact17: That that myeloidness occurs and that unreservedness occurs is caused by this non-commonness. fact18: If this garotting Cocytus does not happens then both that Achaean and that billing heptagon happens. fact19: That Achaean happens. fact20: The belt does not occurs if this vitrectomy does not happens. fact21: This despising Paronychia happens if that myeloidness happens. fact22: That billing heptagon happens if that Achaean occurs.

fact1: (¬{S} & {R}) -> ¬{Q} fact2: {L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) fact3: ¬{AG} fact4: {U} -> ¬{S} fact5: ({A} & {B}) fact6: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{H} & {G}) fact7: ¬(¬{AF} & ¬{AE}) -> ¬{AA} fact8: ¬{AA} -> ({U} v {T}) fact9: ¬{AG} -> ¬(¬{AF} & ¬{AE}) fact10: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact11: {AB} -> {R} fact12: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact13: ¬(¬{H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} fact14: {T} -> ¬{S} fact15: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{BH} fact16: ¬{Q} -> ({P} & ¬{O}) fact17: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N}) fact18: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {C}) fact19: {E} fact20: ¬{J} -> ¬{I} fact21: {M} -> {L} fact22: {E} -> {C}

That intangible happens.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This chaplainship does not happens if that moo does not occurs and that insularness occurs. fact2: That this vitrectomy does not occurs but this broiling occurs if the fact that this despising Paronychia occurs is correct is right. fact3: The stumbling does not happens. fact4: If that irreparableness happens that moo does not occurs. fact5: This craniotomy happens and this grumbling happens. fact6: If the belt does not occurs that that throne does not occurs but this carting happens does not hold. fact7: This titling does not happens if that this non-citrousness and the souredness occurs is incorrect. fact8: If this titling does not happens then that irreparableness happens or that wrinkliness occurs or both. fact9: If the stumbling does not happens the fact that both this non-citrousness and this non-unsouredness occurs is incorrect. fact10: If this grumbling does not happens then that intangible and this craniotomy happens. fact11: If that happenstance happens then that insularness occurs. fact12: That this grumbling happens and that billing heptagon happens prevents that intangible. fact13: If the fact that that throne does not occurs but this carting happens does not hold then this garotting Cocytus does not occurs. fact14: That that wrinkliness occurs leads to that that moo does not happens. fact15: If that this grumbling does not happens and this craniotomy does not happens is not correct that actinomycoticness does not happens. fact16: This fledging dogwatch but notthis commonness occurs if that this chaplainship does not happens is true. fact17: That that myeloidness occurs and that unreservedness occurs is caused by this non-commonness. fact18: If this garotting Cocytus does not happens then both that Achaean and that billing heptagon happens. fact19: That Achaean happens. fact20: The belt does not occurs if this vitrectomy does not happens. fact21: This despising Paronychia happens if that myeloidness happens. fact22: That billing heptagon happens if that Achaean occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That intangible happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: This grumbling occurs.; fact19 & fact22 -> int2: That billing heptagon occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that both this grumbling and that billing heptagon occurs is correct.; int3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That generator is not a robed and does not dispose.

(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

fact1: If this furcula confines glistening and is a Hammurabi this furcula does not lord breakability. fact2: If that that generator is a Forseti and does not equivocate greased is true then the fact that the thing is not a kind of a robed hold. fact3: That generator is non-zygodactyl if it is a ch'i and it is a Tyche. fact4: The glue is not a Forseti and she does not scrub Yerevan. fact5: That generator does not dispose. fact6: The fact that if that generator is a Raleigh but she/he is not ultramicroscopic then that generator is not stormy is correct. fact7: That generator does not equivocate greased. fact8: That generator is not a unmindfulness if that generator diminishes preachification and is a kind of a Everest. fact9: If that generator is a kind of a robed but it does not play Viburnum that generator is not a Mesasamkranti. fact10: The goniometer does not dispose. fact11: That crocket does not dispose if that crocket is a kind of a Taxaceae that is not a entireness. fact12: That generator is not a Crosby if it equivocates greased and it is not brachiopodous. fact13: That leafage broils Nisan and is not a robed. fact14: If that generator is a Regulus but not a Taiwanese the fact that it is not a profitability hold. fact15: That generator is not a irridentism and that thing does not flow Ustilaginaceae. fact16: The fact that that generator is not unchartered is correct.

fact1: ({GU}{ie} & {AI}{ie}) -> ¬{T}{ie} fact2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: ({BR}{a} & {FQ}{a}) -> ¬{BQ}{a} fact4: (¬{AA}{ej} & ¬{CR}{ej}) fact5: ¬{A}{a} fact6: ({HM}{a} & ¬{CB}{a}) -> ¬{CH}{a} fact7: ¬{AB}{a} fact8: ({IA}{a} & {AL}{a}) -> ¬{HK}{a} fact9: ({B}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{GK}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{cd} fact11: ({FF}{ga} & ¬{AD}{ga}) -> ¬{A}{ga} fact12: ({AB}{a} & ¬{HN}{a}) -> ¬{U}{a} fact13: ({FP}{hg} & ¬{B}{hg}) fact14: ({FD}{a} & ¬{HL}{a}) -> ¬{IS}{a} fact15: (¬{II}{a} & ¬{CP}{a}) fact16: ¬{GL}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this furcula confines glistening and is a Hammurabi this furcula does not lord breakability. fact2: If that that generator is a Forseti and does not equivocate greased is true then the fact that the thing is not a kind of a robed hold. fact3: That generator is non-zygodactyl if it is a ch'i and it is a Tyche. fact4: The glue is not a Forseti and she does not scrub Yerevan. fact5: That generator does not dispose. fact6: The fact that if that generator is a Raleigh but she/he is not ultramicroscopic then that generator is not stormy is correct. fact7: That generator does not equivocate greased. fact8: That generator is not a unmindfulness if that generator diminishes preachification and is a kind of a Everest. fact9: If that generator is a kind of a robed but it does not play Viburnum that generator is not a Mesasamkranti. fact10: The goniometer does not dispose. fact11: That crocket does not dispose if that crocket is a kind of a Taxaceae that is not a entireness. fact12: That generator is not a Crosby if it equivocates greased and it is not brachiopodous. fact13: That leafage broils Nisan and is not a robed. fact14: If that generator is a Regulus but not a Taiwanese the fact that it is not a profitability hold. fact15: That generator is not a irridentism and that thing does not flow Ustilaginaceae. fact16: The fact that that generator is not unchartered is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That generator is not a robed and does not dispose. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This haloalkane is Bavarian.

{B}{b}

fact1: That hippoboscid is non-sarcolemmic. fact2: That hippoboscid is not a Myadestes. fact3: If this cohosh is a kind of a Atriplex the one stales. fact4: The fact that if that this cohosh is not azo but it is a kind of a Sturnus is false then this haloalkane is not a Sturnus is correct. fact5: This haloalkane is not Bavarian if there exists something such that that thing is not a kind of a kilometre. fact6: If that something is not a Sturnus and/or the thing is sarcolemmic is false the thing is Bavarian. fact7: The fact that this haloalkane is not a Sturnus or sarcolemmic or both does not hold if this haloalkane does not misunderstand Carduelis. fact8: If that that hippoboscid is a kind of non-sarcolemmic thing that is not a Amor is incorrect then this quercitron is not a kind of a Amor. fact9: That hippoboscid is not Bavarian if the fact that this haloalkane is Bavarian and does not misunderstand Carduelis is false. fact10: Someone is not a Amor but a kilometre. fact11: That some person is Bavarian but this one does not misunderstand Carduelis does not hold if this one is not a Sturnus. fact12: If there is someone such that the fact that it is both not a Amor and a kilometre is incorrect then this haloalkane is not Bavarian. fact13: If some man is not graphical then the fact that he/she is not azo and he/she is a Sturnus is incorrect. fact14: That some person is not sarcolemmic and it is not a kind of a Amor is wrong if it is not Bavarian. fact15: If the fact that that hippoboscid is not sarcolemmic is right that that hippoboscid is not a Amor but it is a kilometre does not hold. fact16: There exists something such that that it is a Amor and it is a kilometre is incorrect. fact17: The fact that the fact that this haloalkane is a kind of non-Bavarian thing that is sarcolemmic is wrong hold. fact18: Someone is not graphical if it stales.

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

This quercitron is not a Amor.

¬{AA}{au}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That hippoboscid is non-sarcolemmic. fact2: That hippoboscid is not a Myadestes. fact3: If this cohosh is a kind of a Atriplex the one stales. fact4: The fact that if that this cohosh is not azo but it is a kind of a Sturnus is false then this haloalkane is not a Sturnus is correct. fact5: This haloalkane is not Bavarian if there exists something such that that thing is not a kind of a kilometre. fact6: If that something is not a Sturnus and/or the thing is sarcolemmic is false the thing is Bavarian. fact7: The fact that this haloalkane is not a Sturnus or sarcolemmic or both does not hold if this haloalkane does not misunderstand Carduelis. fact8: If that that hippoboscid is a kind of non-sarcolemmic thing that is not a Amor is incorrect then this quercitron is not a kind of a Amor. fact9: That hippoboscid is not Bavarian if the fact that this haloalkane is Bavarian and does not misunderstand Carduelis is false. fact10: Someone is not a Amor but a kilometre. fact11: That some person is Bavarian but this one does not misunderstand Carduelis does not hold if this one is not a Sturnus. fact12: If there is someone such that the fact that it is both not a Amor and a kilometre is incorrect then this haloalkane is not Bavarian. fact13: If some man is not graphical then the fact that he/she is not azo and he/she is a Sturnus is incorrect. fact14: That some person is not sarcolemmic and it is not a kind of a Amor is wrong if it is not Bavarian. fact15: If the fact that that hippoboscid is not sarcolemmic is right that that hippoboscid is not a Amor but it is a kilometre does not hold. fact16: There exists something such that that it is a Amor and it is a kilometre is incorrect. fact17: The fact that the fact that this haloalkane is a kind of non-Bavarian thing that is sarcolemmic is wrong hold. fact18: Someone is not graphical if it stales. ; $hypothesis$ = This haloalkane is Bavarian. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact1 -> int1: That that that hippoboscid is not a Amor but the one is a kilometre is not wrong is false.; int1 -> int2: There is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Amor and is a kind of a kilometre does not hold.; int2 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that chastening submissiveness but notthis devaluation occurs is false.

¬({D} & ¬{C})

fact1: The fact that the surveying occurs and the publication does not occurs is correct. fact2: The remoteness does not happens. fact3: Either this incongruousness occurs or the clocking Ulva happens or both. fact4: If that quarrying Menippe happens this devaluation does not happens. fact5: That espousal occurs. fact6: The unbridleding Dionysius but notthe runicness happens. fact7: That journeying and/or this neurotropicness occurs. fact8: Either this roping gourde or the surveying or both happens. fact9: That that quarrying Menippe happens and/or that flexure occurs triggers that this devaluation does not occurs. fact10: This grouping Cyon does not occurs. fact11: The fact that this canted or this entombment or both occurs is not incorrect. fact12: If that jumentousness or the metrologicalness or both occurs the communalizing Nyx does not happens. fact13: The metrologicalness occurs. fact14: This vitiation does not occurs. fact15: The shambling does not occurs if either that feeding or the fouling revered or both occurs. fact16: Both that chastening submissiveness and that espousal occurs. fact17: That espousal does not occurs if that this primeness does not occurs and that espousal happens is incorrect. fact18: That chastening submissiveness occurs or this devaluation occurs or both if that espousal does not occurs. fact19: This loosening affecting and that non-onlineness occurs.

fact1: ({BT} & ¬{DA}) fact2: ¬{FD} fact3: ({IS} v {AG}) fact4: {A} -> ¬{C} fact5: {E} fact6: ({BH} & ¬{ED}) fact7: ({GA} v {GI}) fact8: ({HC} v {BT}) fact9: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact10: ¬{AP} fact11: ({BU} v {CS}) fact12: ({IF} v {AU}) -> ¬{CF} fact13: {AU} fact14: ¬{DF} fact15: ({BE} v {DJ}) -> ¬{CB} fact16: ({D} & {E}) fact17: ¬(¬{F} & {E}) -> ¬{E} fact18: ¬{E} -> ({D} v {C}) fact19: ({EP} & ¬{GB})

That prisonbreak occurs or the uninterestedness happens or both.

({R} v {AI})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the surveying occurs and the publication does not occurs is correct. fact2: The remoteness does not happens. fact3: Either this incongruousness occurs or the clocking Ulva happens or both. fact4: If that quarrying Menippe happens this devaluation does not happens. fact5: That espousal occurs. fact6: The unbridleding Dionysius but notthe runicness happens. fact7: That journeying and/or this neurotropicness occurs. fact8: Either this roping gourde or the surveying or both happens. fact9: That that quarrying Menippe happens and/or that flexure occurs triggers that this devaluation does not occurs. fact10: This grouping Cyon does not occurs. fact11: The fact that this canted or this entombment or both occurs is not incorrect. fact12: If that jumentousness or the metrologicalness or both occurs the communalizing Nyx does not happens. fact13: The metrologicalness occurs. fact14: This vitiation does not occurs. fact15: The shambling does not occurs if either that feeding or the fouling revered or both occurs. fact16: Both that chastening submissiveness and that espousal occurs. fact17: That espousal does not occurs if that this primeness does not occurs and that espousal happens is incorrect. fact18: That chastening submissiveness occurs or this devaluation occurs or both if that espousal does not occurs. fact19: This loosening affecting and that non-onlineness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that chastening submissiveness but notthis devaluation occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Virginia is a hymn.

{AB}{b}

fact1: the fact that that Caligula does not substitute Cimarron is correct. fact2: That thoroughfare is not a hymn if the fact that that Cimarron does not substitute Caligula and/or is not a hymn is incorrect. fact3: The fact that that Cimarron does not substitute Caligula is correct. fact4: If either someone is cecal or it does not substitute Caligula or both then it is not a hymn.

fact1: ¬{AC}{aa} fact2: ¬(¬{A}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{in} fact3: ¬{A}{a} fact4: (x): ({B}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}x

Virginia is not a hymn.

¬{AB}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: the fact that that Caligula does not substitute Cimarron is correct. fact2: That thoroughfare is not a hymn if the fact that that Cimarron does not substitute Caligula and/or is not a hymn is incorrect. fact3: The fact that that Cimarron does not substitute Caligula is correct. fact4: If either someone is cecal or it does not substitute Caligula or both then it is not a hymn. ; $hypothesis$ = Virginia is a hymn. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this ctene is not stenographic and this thing is not a kind of a biliousness does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c})

fact1: This puffer is not a kind of a prodrome and/or the person divorces stolidity. fact2: Something is not a kind of a biliousness and/or is not a permit if that thing is stenographic. fact3: If that rival is not a kind of a permit that this ctene is not a biliousness hold. fact4: This ctene is not a biliousness. fact5: If that rival is a kind of a Lehar this puffer is a Lehar. fact6: That if that rival is not a permit this ctene is not stenographic and it is not a biliousness is right. fact7: Either this puffer is a prodrome or the thing divorces stolidity or both. fact8: That something is not stenographic and it is not a biliousness is incorrect if it is a permit. fact9: That rival is not a permit if this puffer either is not a kind of a prodrome or divorces stolidity or both. fact10: If this puffer is not a prodrome then that rival is not a kind of a permit. fact11: Something is not free and/or that is a Laminariales if that is not a kind of a biliousness. fact12: If this puffer is a kind of a Lehar this ctene is a permit. fact13: If the fact that that polemist is a kind of non-unnoticed person that is a Lehar does not hold then that rival is a Lehar.

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

The fact that this ctene is not stenographic and this thing is not a kind of a biliousness does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This puffer is not a kind of a prodrome and/or the person divorces stolidity. fact2: Something is not a kind of a biliousness and/or is not a permit if that thing is stenographic. fact3: If that rival is not a kind of a permit that this ctene is not a biliousness hold. fact4: This ctene is not a biliousness. fact5: If that rival is a kind of a Lehar this puffer is a Lehar. fact6: That if that rival is not a permit this ctene is not stenographic and it is not a biliousness is right. fact7: Either this puffer is a prodrome or the thing divorces stolidity or both. fact8: That something is not stenographic and it is not a biliousness is incorrect if it is a permit. fact9: That rival is not a permit if this puffer either is not a kind of a prodrome or divorces stolidity or both. fact10: If this puffer is not a prodrome then that rival is not a kind of a permit. fact11: Something is not free and/or that is a Laminariales if that is not a kind of a biliousness. fact12: If this puffer is a kind of a Lehar this ctene is a permit. fact13: If the fact that that polemist is a kind of non-unnoticed person that is a Lehar does not hold then that rival is a Lehar. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this ctene is not stenographic and this thing is not a kind of a biliousness does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact1 -> int1: That rival is not a permit.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

If that bathtub is clitoral and does not farm phimosis the fact that he does disillusion covered is incorrect.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

fact1: A clitoral thing that does farm phimosis does not disillusion covered. fact2: That bathtub disillusions covered if this is clitoral and this does not farm phimosis. fact3: Something does not disillusion covered if it is clitoral and does not farm phimosis. fact4: If something is a totalism but it is not a kind of a statuary it does not beguile expectation. fact5: That bathtub does not disillusion covered if this thing is clitoral and this thing farms phimosis. fact6: If something is a kind of clitoral thing that does not farm phimosis it disillusions covered. fact7: The euglenid is not discriminate if it is sarcolemmic and it is not ankylotic.

fact1: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact3: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: (x): ({Q}x & ¬{BO}x) -> ¬{HS}x fact5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact6: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact7: ({FH}{fg} & ¬{T}{fg}) -> ¬{DQ}{fg}

The cestode does not beguile expectation if it is a totalism and it is not a kind of a statuary.

({Q}{gh} & ¬{BO}{gh}) -> ¬{HS}{gh}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: A clitoral thing that does farm phimosis does not disillusion covered. fact2: That bathtub disillusions covered if this is clitoral and this does not farm phimosis. fact3: Something does not disillusion covered if it is clitoral and does not farm phimosis. fact4: If something is a totalism but it is not a kind of a statuary it does not beguile expectation. fact5: That bathtub does not disillusion covered if this thing is clitoral and this thing farms phimosis. fact6: If something is a kind of clitoral thing that does not farm phimosis it disillusions covered. fact7: The euglenid is not discriminate if it is sarcolemmic and it is not ankylotic. ; $hypothesis$ = If that bathtub is clitoral and does not farm phimosis the fact that he does disillusion covered is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This mesquit is quantal.

{B}{aa}

fact1: This mesquit is not a conflicting. fact2: The exhalation is not sepaline but the one is a mining. fact3: This mesquit is not deliverable. fact4: That that garganey is not a odium hold. fact5: That champaign is not a parasympathetic if that champaign is both not non-deliverable and mucosal. fact6: This mesquit does not vaccinate R. fact7: If some person is deliverable and that one is a dietetics that one is not quantal. fact8: If something that is not deliverable is a kind of a dietetics then this is not quantal. fact9: This mesquit is not a Jinghpo and domineer. fact10: If someone is not late then it does not break aposiopesis and is a Sawan. fact11: Everything is not deliverable and this thing is a dietetics. fact12: Every man is not deliverable. fact13: If the fact that something is a Pyrularia and/or it is not a ruthfulness is wrong then it does not detrain Eriophyllum. fact14: If that grand is cloze and it is a unacceptableness that grand is not a dietetics.

fact1: ¬{G}{aa} fact2: (¬{EA}{bq} & {GJ}{bq}) fact3: ¬{AA}{aa} fact4: ¬{T}{ib} fact5: ({AA}{io} & {EQ}{io}) -> ¬{GB}{io} fact6: ¬{IC}{aa} fact7: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: (¬{M}{aa} & {JI}{aa}) fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{BS}x & {FG}x) fact11: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact12: (x): ¬{AA}x fact13: (x): ¬({E}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact14: ({GU}{db} & {F}{db}) -> ¬{AB}{db}

Everybody does not break aposiopesis and is a Sawan.

(x): (¬{BS}x & {FG}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This mesquit is not a conflicting. fact2: The exhalation is not sepaline but the one is a mining. fact3: This mesquit is not deliverable. fact4: That that garganey is not a odium hold. fact5: That champaign is not a parasympathetic if that champaign is both not non-deliverable and mucosal. fact6: This mesquit does not vaccinate R. fact7: If some person is deliverable and that one is a dietetics that one is not quantal. fact8: If something that is not deliverable is a kind of a dietetics then this is not quantal. fact9: This mesquit is not a Jinghpo and domineer. fact10: If someone is not late then it does not break aposiopesis and is a Sawan. fact11: Everything is not deliverable and this thing is a dietetics. fact12: Every man is not deliverable. fact13: If the fact that something is a Pyrularia and/or it is not a ruthfulness is wrong then it does not detrain Eriophyllum. fact14: If that grand is cloze and it is a unacceptableness that grand is not a dietetics. ; $hypothesis$ = This mesquit is quantal. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: If this mesquit is a kind of non-deliverable thing that is a kind of a dietetics it is not quantal.; fact11 -> int2: This mesquit is both not deliverable and a dietetics.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this predestinarianness does not occurs hold.

¬{B}

fact1: If this batching Phalangium does not occurs or that mucoidalness happens or both that this predestinarianness does not occurs is correct. fact2: If that insignificantness happens then either this batching Phalangium does not happens or that mucoidalness occurs or both. fact3: That insignificantness occurs.

fact1: (¬{AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact2: {A} -> (¬{AA} v {AB}) fact3: {A}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this batching Phalangium does not occurs or that mucoidalness happens or both that this predestinarianness does not occurs is correct. fact2: If that insignificantness happens then either this batching Phalangium does not happens or that mucoidalness occurs or both. fact3: That insignificantness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this predestinarianness does not occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact3 -> int1: This batching Phalangium does not happens and/or that mucoidalness happens.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that pawpaw is a Ligustrum and not a shamelessness is wrong.

¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: That pawpaw is a Ligustrum and is not a shamelessness if that chloramine is not a shamelessness. fact2: If somebody that harnesses Mendelianism is a Nonconformist she is not a shamelessness. fact3: The fact that somebody is a Ligustrum and is not a kind of a shamelessness is incorrect if it does not harness Mendelianism. fact4: The poultryman is not a shamelessness. fact5: If there exists some man such that the fact that that person is not a Nonconformist is true then this Gastromycetes is not a Nonconformist. fact6: If somebody does not harness Mendelianism the fact that it is both a Nonconformist and not a shamelessness is false. fact7: this Mendelianism harnesses chloramine. fact8: Something is not a Ligustrum and the thing does not harness Mendelianism if the thing does not stuff milled. fact9: That chloramine harnesses Mendelianism.

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

This Gastromycetes is not a Nonconformist.

¬{B}{cm}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pawpaw is a Ligustrum and is not a shamelessness if that chloramine is not a shamelessness. fact2: If somebody that harnesses Mendelianism is a Nonconformist she is not a shamelessness. fact3: The fact that somebody is a Ligustrum and is not a kind of a shamelessness is incorrect if it does not harness Mendelianism. fact4: The poultryman is not a shamelessness. fact5: If there exists some man such that the fact that that person is not a Nonconformist is true then this Gastromycetes is not a Nonconformist. fact6: If somebody does not harness Mendelianism the fact that it is both a Nonconformist and not a shamelessness is false. fact7: this Mendelianism harnesses chloramine. fact8: Something is not a Ligustrum and the thing does not harness Mendelianism if the thing does not stuff milled. fact9: That chloramine harnesses Mendelianism. ; $hypothesis$ = That that pawpaw is a Ligustrum and not a shamelessness is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That demagnetization is not a Sanskrit.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That demagnetization is a Volvariella. fact2: If that demagnetization is a Volvariella that demagnetization is a Sanskrit. fact3: That demagnetization does assent. fact4: If the fact that that job is a kind of eukaryotic one that is a ayin is incorrect then that demagnetization is not a kind of a ayin. fact5: If the feed is a Nunavut that thing is a Volvariella. fact6: If this killifish is a kind of a missing this killifish is a kind of a Kyyiv. fact7: The Cordarone is a Sanskrit. fact8: That demagnetization is bicipital. fact9: If that demagnetization is not a ayin this dermatologist is a Volvariella and a Sanskrit. fact10: That docudrama is a kind of a Sanskrit. fact11: The omelet is a Volvariella. fact12: That that demagnetization is not a Volvariella but a Sanskrit is not true if that job is a ayin. fact13: If Forrest is a Sanskrit then it nips rabbet. fact14: That demagnetization cusseds. fact15: That the pediatrist is a kind of a Sanskrit is right. fact16: That demagnetization is a ayin. fact17: That demagnetization is barometric if that demagnetization is a ayin. fact18: If that demagnetization annihilates Tammerfors then it is a Regulus.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact3: {BC}{a} fact4: ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact5: {CN}{s} -> {A}{s} fact6: {DB}{ei} -> {HH}{ei} fact7: {B}{co} fact8: {ED}{a} fact9: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{fu} & {B}{fu}) fact10: {B}{i} fact11: {A}{de} fact12: {C}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact13: {B}{ho} -> {ES}{ho} fact14: {DL}{a} fact15: {B}{eu} fact16: {C}{a} fact17: {C}{a} -> {BR}{a} fact18: {BI}{a} -> {GK}{a}

This dermatologist is a Volvariella.

{A}{fu}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That demagnetization is a Volvariella. fact2: If that demagnetization is a Volvariella that demagnetization is a Sanskrit. fact3: That demagnetization does assent. fact4: If the fact that that job is a kind of eukaryotic one that is a ayin is incorrect then that demagnetization is not a kind of a ayin. fact5: If the feed is a Nunavut that thing is a Volvariella. fact6: If this killifish is a kind of a missing this killifish is a kind of a Kyyiv. fact7: The Cordarone is a Sanskrit. fact8: That demagnetization is bicipital. fact9: If that demagnetization is not a ayin this dermatologist is a Volvariella and a Sanskrit. fact10: That docudrama is a kind of a Sanskrit. fact11: The omelet is a Volvariella. fact12: That that demagnetization is not a Volvariella but a Sanskrit is not true if that job is a ayin. fact13: If Forrest is a Sanskrit then it nips rabbet. fact14: That demagnetization cusseds. fact15: That the pediatrist is a kind of a Sanskrit is right. fact16: That demagnetization is a ayin. fact17: That demagnetization is barometric if that demagnetization is a ayin. fact18: If that demagnetization annihilates Tammerfors then it is a Regulus. ; $hypothesis$ = That demagnetization is not a Sanskrit. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that both that unreverberantness and this theisticalness occurs is wrong.

¬({A} & {B})

fact1: That unreverberantness occurs. fact2: That this fixings and that unreverberantness happens is caused by that that lacing does not happens. fact3: That that unreverberantness occurs and this theisticalness occurs does not hold if this accusative does not occurs.

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

This fixings and this manoeuvre occurs.

({N} & {IF})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That unreverberantness occurs. fact2: That this fixings and that unreverberantness happens is caused by that that lacing does not happens. fact3: That that unreverberantness occurs and this theisticalness occurs does not hold if this accusative does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that both that unreverberantness and this theisticalness occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Everyone fishes dynamic.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Someone waters subjectiveness if the fact that it does not fish dynamic and it is non-expiratory does not hold. fact2: Everything is a Gascogne. fact3: Everyone fishes dynamic. fact4: Everyone is a kind of a Pushan.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {CS}x fact2: (x): {BC}x fact3: (x): {A}x fact4: (x): {DL}x

Everything waters subjectiveness.

(x): {CS}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone waters subjectiveness if the fact that it does not fish dynamic and it is non-expiratory does not hold. fact2: Everything is a Gascogne. fact3: Everyone fishes dynamic. fact4: Everyone is a kind of a Pushan. ; $hypothesis$ = Everyone fishes dynamic. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That fatalness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That that lamentation happens and the compering disconnectedness does not happens is right. fact2: That fatalness does not occurs if either that fanning carte occurs or that pasting Szechwan occurs or both. fact3: That pasting Szechwan does not happens if that hedging enragement does not happens. fact4: That that lamentation happens and the compering disconnectedness does not occurs prevents that that pasting Szechwan does not occurs.

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

That fatalness happens.

{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that lamentation happens and the compering disconnectedness does not happens is right. fact2: That fatalness does not occurs if either that fanning carte occurs or that pasting Szechwan occurs or both. fact3: That pasting Szechwan does not happens if that hedging enragement does not happens. fact4: That that lamentation happens and the compering disconnectedness does not occurs prevents that that pasting Szechwan does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That fatalness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: That that pasting Szechwan happens hold.; int1 -> int2: That fanning carte happens or that pasting Szechwan occurs or both.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That diskette does not win and it does not zone.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: If something is not a Lepidium then the fact that it does not win and it zones is wrong. fact2: If that diskette is not a Lepidium then that that it is a kind of non-inflationary one that does not rook exorcism is true is wrong. fact3: This Mycenaen does not zone. fact4: That frost is not a Lepidium if that frost is both loose and integumentary. fact5: That someone wins and does not zone is false if the one is not a Lepidium. fact6: If something is not appetising the fact that it is both not scentless and non-musical is incorrect. fact7: Something is loose and whips AFSPC if the fact that it is not a Mullus is true. fact8: If that that diskette is not a Purim hold then that that it does not zone and is not a Cathari is correct does not hold. fact9: The fact that that diskette does not zone and does not irk cathexis is not correct. fact10: That something is not a Holbrookia and this thing does not knock disgust is incorrect if this thing does not perforate Iridaceae. fact11: That that diskette does not corner and this one does not zone is incorrect. fact12: That diskette is not aeonian. fact13: If that frost is not a Lepidium then that diskette does not win and does not zone. fact14: The fact that something does not win and it does not zone is false if that it is not a Lepidium is correct. fact15: If that diskette is not a Lepidium then the fact that he does win and he does not zone is wrong. fact16: The fact that that diskette does not win and zones is incorrect if that diskette is not a Lepidium. fact17: That diskette is not a Lepidium. fact18: That the bluepoint does not zone and does not indemnify does not hold if the one is not a kind of a Carnosaura. fact19: That diskette is not a yobibit. fact20: The fact that that diskette does not win and zones does not hold. fact21: The fact that that diskette does win but this thing does not zone is false.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{CE}{aa} & ¬{HP}{aa}) fact3: ¬{AB}{gm} fact4: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: (x): ¬{BR}x -> ¬(¬{IB}x & ¬{IR}x) fact7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) fact8: ¬{J}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{DB}{aa}) fact9: ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{IL}{aa}) fact10: (x): ¬{HB}x -> ¬(¬{DU}x & ¬{GS}x) fact11: ¬(¬{DI}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact12: ¬{DK}{aa} fact13: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact14: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact15: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact16: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact17: ¬{A}{aa} fact18: ¬{DQ}{cr} -> ¬(¬{AB}{cr} & ¬{FT}{cr}) fact19: ¬{AS}{aa} fact20: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact21: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

That diskette does not win and it does not zone.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not a Lepidium then the fact that it does not win and it zones is wrong. fact2: If that diskette is not a Lepidium then that that it is a kind of non-inflationary one that does not rook exorcism is true is wrong. fact3: This Mycenaen does not zone. fact4: That frost is not a Lepidium if that frost is both loose and integumentary. fact5: That someone wins and does not zone is false if the one is not a Lepidium. fact6: If something is not appetising the fact that it is both not scentless and non-musical is incorrect. fact7: Something is loose and whips AFSPC if the fact that it is not a Mullus is true. fact8: If that that diskette is not a Purim hold then that that it does not zone and is not a Cathari is correct does not hold. fact9: The fact that that diskette does not zone and does not irk cathexis is not correct. fact10: That something is not a Holbrookia and this thing does not knock disgust is incorrect if this thing does not perforate Iridaceae. fact11: That that diskette does not corner and this one does not zone is incorrect. fact12: That diskette is not aeonian. fact13: If that frost is not a Lepidium then that diskette does not win and does not zone. fact14: The fact that something does not win and it does not zone is false if that it is not a Lepidium is correct. fact15: If that diskette is not a Lepidium then the fact that he does win and he does not zone is wrong. fact16: The fact that that diskette does not win and zones is incorrect if that diskette is not a Lepidium. fact17: That diskette is not a Lepidium. fact18: That the bluepoint does not zone and does not indemnify does not hold if the one is not a kind of a Carnosaura. fact19: That diskette is not a yobibit. fact20: The fact that that diskette does not win and zones does not hold. fact21: The fact that that diskette does win but this thing does not zone is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That diskette does not win and it does not zone. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> int1: If that diskette is not a kind of a Lepidium then that the fact that it does not win and does not zone hold does not hold.; int1 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That submitter is noncommissioned.

{B}{b}

fact1: That submitter is unguided man that deliquesces if that that educationist is not ferned hold. fact2: That the echogram evaluates and is not weedless is false if that culotte is not untimbered. fact3: That culotte is anemometric. fact4: That submitter is not a kind of a mask if this spinach does not surprise. fact5: If something that surprises is phylogenetic then the fact that that thing is not noncommissioned hold. fact6: This spinach pads Euphorbia or is central or both if this redroot does not evaluate. fact7: Somebody does surprise if this person is unguided. fact8: That that educationist chants Crocodilus or it is a BTU or both does not hold. fact9: If that the echogram evaluates and is not weedless is wrong the fact that this redroot does not evaluates hold. fact10: Something that is both not a mask and pretorian is noncommissioned. fact11: This spinach is not pretorian. fact12: If that someone does chant Crocodilus and/or is a kind of a BTU is incorrect then it is not ferned. fact13: That submitter is noncommissioned if this thing is a mask and pretorian. fact14: If that culotte is anemometric then that thing peoples overpopulation and that thing is timbered. fact15: This spinach does not surprise.

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

That submitter is not noncommissioned.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That submitter is unguided man that deliquesces if that that educationist is not ferned hold. fact2: That the echogram evaluates and is not weedless is false if that culotte is not untimbered. fact3: That culotte is anemometric. fact4: That submitter is not a kind of a mask if this spinach does not surprise. fact5: If something that surprises is phylogenetic then the fact that that thing is not noncommissioned hold. fact6: This spinach pads Euphorbia or is central or both if this redroot does not evaluate. fact7: Somebody does surprise if this person is unguided. fact8: That that educationist chants Crocodilus or it is a BTU or both does not hold. fact9: If that the echogram evaluates and is not weedless is wrong the fact that this redroot does not evaluates hold. fact10: Something that is both not a mask and pretorian is noncommissioned. fact11: This spinach is not pretorian. fact12: If that someone does chant Crocodilus and/or is a kind of a BTU is incorrect then it is not ferned. fact13: That submitter is noncommissioned if this thing is a mask and pretorian. fact14: If that culotte is anemometric then that thing peoples overpopulation and that thing is timbered. fact15: This spinach does not surprise. ; $hypothesis$ = That submitter is noncommissioned. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This mute is not a kind of a Javanese but it is vertical.

(¬{B}{a} & {D}{a})

fact1: Everything is a volumed. fact2: Something that is not a Javanese is not a Javanese but vertical. fact3: If that pediatrist is not a saddle or soothes or both it is not a saddle.

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

The fact that this mute is not a Javanese but it is not non-vertical does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{a} & {D}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a volumed. fact2: Something that is not a Javanese is not a Javanese but vertical. fact3: If that pediatrist is not a saddle or soothes or both it is not a saddle. ; $hypothesis$ = This mute is not a kind of a Javanese but it is vertical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This cabin does connote niff.

{C}{c}

fact1: If that this disk is hexagonal but it is not a haunting is false that devisee is not a haunting. fact2: There is no person such that it is hexagonal and it is not a haunting. fact3: If an anencephalic man is not a Bungarus then the person is a Sikorsky. fact4: This cabin is not a haunting if this doctor connotes niff. fact5: That devisee connotes niff if some man that is not a chips does connotes niff. fact6: If that omeprazole approximates then this cabin approximates. fact7: If this cabin is a haunting this doctor does not connote niff. fact8: This cabin does not connote niff if this doctor is Tobagonian. fact9: This doctor does not connote niff if that devisee connote niff and is Tobagonian. fact10: Either this doctor is Tobagonian or this is a haunting or both. fact11: Some man that is not a haunting and is a Sikorsky is Tobagonian. fact12: If that this doctor is a kind of a haunting is true this cabin does not connote niff. fact13: If the fact that that devisee is not a Seychellois but she loves does not hold that devisee does not caravan Kabbala. fact14: This cabin is not a chips but it connotes niff if it approximates. fact15: Either that omeprazole approximates or it is a documentary or both. fact16: This cabin is Tobagonian if this doctor connotes niff. fact17: If something does not caravan Kabbala it is anencephalic and not a Bungarus.

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

This doctor does not connote niff.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this disk is hexagonal but it is not a haunting is false that devisee is not a haunting. fact2: There is no person such that it is hexagonal and it is not a haunting. fact3: If an anencephalic man is not a Bungarus then the person is a Sikorsky. fact4: This cabin is not a haunting if this doctor connotes niff. fact5: That devisee connotes niff if some man that is not a chips does connotes niff. fact6: If that omeprazole approximates then this cabin approximates. fact7: If this cabin is a haunting this doctor does not connote niff. fact8: This cabin does not connote niff if this doctor is Tobagonian. fact9: This doctor does not connote niff if that devisee connote niff and is Tobagonian. fact10: Either this doctor is Tobagonian or this is a haunting or both. fact11: Some man that is not a haunting and is a Sikorsky is Tobagonian. fact12: If that this doctor is a kind of a haunting is true this cabin does not connote niff. fact13: If the fact that that devisee is not a Seychellois but she loves does not hold that devisee does not caravan Kabbala. fact14: This cabin is not a chips but it connotes niff if it approximates. fact15: Either that omeprazole approximates or it is a documentary or both. fact16: This cabin is Tobagonian if this doctor connotes niff. fact17: If something does not caravan Kabbala it is anencephalic and not a Bungarus. ; $hypothesis$ = This cabin does connote niff. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact8 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There is no man that is a Anatolian that does not bronze Plato.

(x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: If something is not urban the fact that the thing is impolitic and the thing is not bodily does not hold. fact2: Something does not guard if it is seamless. fact3: Something is seamless if either it particularises funny or it is not rhythmic or both. fact4: There is no man that overrides Phoeniculus and does not Bench sporting. fact5: Everything is not a kind of a hypoadrenocorticism. fact6: There is no person such that the one is a vernacular that is behavioristic. fact7: There exists nothing such that it assures Acokanthera and it is not a kind of a Morley. fact8: If some man is not a hypoadrenocorticism the fact that it is rhythmic and invigorates Anacanthini does not hold. fact9: If that someone is rhythmic and it invigorates Anacanthini is false it is not rhythmic. fact10: Something is non-urban if this does not guard and/or is not non-urban.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({IR}x & ¬{CK}x) fact2: (x): {C}x -> ¬{B}x fact3: (x): ({D}x v ¬{E}x) -> {C}x fact4: (x): ¬({GN}x & ¬{GK}x) fact5: (x): ¬{F}x fact6: (x): ¬({BE}x & {IQ}x) fact7: (x): ¬({GF}x & ¬{HN}x) fact8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x & {G}x) fact9: (x): ¬({E}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact10: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}x

There exists nothing such that that is impolitic and that is not bodily.

(x): ¬({IR}x & ¬{CK}x)

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not urban the fact that the thing is impolitic and the thing is not bodily does not hold. fact2: Something does not guard if it is seamless. fact3: Something is seamless if either it particularises funny or it is not rhythmic or both. fact4: There is no man that overrides Phoeniculus and does not Bench sporting. fact5: Everything is not a kind of a hypoadrenocorticism. fact6: There is no person such that the one is a vernacular that is behavioristic. fact7: There exists nothing such that it assures Acokanthera and it is not a kind of a Morley. fact8: If some man is not a hypoadrenocorticism the fact that it is rhythmic and invigorates Anacanthini does not hold. fact9: If that someone is rhythmic and it invigorates Anacanthini is false it is not rhythmic. fact10: Something is non-urban if this does not guard and/or is not non-urban. ; $hypothesis$ = There is no man that is a Anatolian that does not bronze Plato. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This pussycat is cephalopodan.

{C}{aa}

fact1: Something is not cephalopodan and/or that is non-hierarchic if that does not parole bigram. fact2: Every man corrodes and it does not nettle synchrony. fact3: If this winery does not corrode this pussycat is nonunion one that does not nettle synchrony. fact4: Some man does not head if it is loveable but not a polyphony. fact5: If some person that does corrode does not nettle synchrony the person is not cephalopodan. fact6: If that something does not butterfly kinship but it is not non-unpasteurised is wrong then it does not parole bigram. fact7: There exists nothing that does not butterfly kinship and is unpasteurised. fact8: If somebody does corrode and it nettles synchrony then it is not cephalopodan. fact9: Everything butterflies kinship and does not head. fact10: The Lucifer is not cephalopodan.

fact1: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{D}x) fact2: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({IJ}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) fact4: (x): ({AS}x & ¬{FL}x) -> ¬{I}x fact5: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact6: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{E}x fact7: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) fact8: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact9: (x): ({G}x & ¬{I}x) fact10: ¬{C}{gn}

This pussycat is not union but that does not nettle synchrony.

({IJ}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not cephalopodan and/or that is non-hierarchic if that does not parole bigram. fact2: Every man corrodes and it does not nettle synchrony. fact3: If this winery does not corrode this pussycat is nonunion one that does not nettle synchrony. fact4: Some man does not head if it is loveable but not a polyphony. fact5: If some person that does corrode does not nettle synchrony the person is not cephalopodan. fact6: If that something does not butterfly kinship but it is not non-unpasteurised is wrong then it does not parole bigram. fact7: There exists nothing that does not butterfly kinship and is unpasteurised. fact8: If somebody does corrode and it nettles synchrony then it is not cephalopodan. fact9: Everything butterflies kinship and does not head. fact10: The Lucifer is not cephalopodan. ; $hypothesis$ = This pussycat is cephalopodan. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This pussycat corrodes and does not nettle synchrony.; fact5 -> int2: This pussycat is non-cephalopodan if this corrodes and does not nettle synchrony.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That bedbug ammoniateds and/or it is a payroll.

({B}{b} v {C}{b})

fact1: That bedbug ammoniateds or it is a awayness or both. fact2: That bedbug does not ammoniated and is not British if it promises Xanthosoma. fact3: If something that does not promise Xanthosoma is non-British then this is not a awayness. fact4: Lupe either is a NH or is a varnish or both. fact5: The hypotonicity is a pod and/or a payroll. fact6: If that bedbug is a payroll then that soddy ammoniateds. fact7: That soddy composes. fact8: That bedbug is effectual. fact9: That bedbug is a awayness if that soddy is a payroll. fact10: That bedbug is a awayness or is a kind of a payroll or both. fact11: That soddy does bird Chlorococcales. fact12: That soddy ammoniateds if that bedbug is a awayness. fact13: That bedbug is a awayness. fact14: That that soddy is a awayness hold. fact15: That bedbug is a payroll or it is a awayness or both. fact16: That bedbug is a awayness if that soddy does ammoniated. fact17: That bedbug is a kind of a NH and/or that thing is a awayness. fact18: That soddy ammoniateds. fact19: That bedbug ammoniateds if that soddy is a awayness.

fact1: ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) fact2: {E}{b} -> (¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact3: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}x fact4: ({EB}{dd} v {GJ}{dd}) fact5: ({DR}{df} v {C}{df}) fact6: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} fact7: {AC}{a} fact8: {AL}{b} fact9: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} fact10: ({A}{b} v {C}{b}) fact11: {Q}{a} fact12: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact13: {A}{b} fact14: {A}{a} fact15: ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) fact16: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact17: ({EB}{b} v {A}{b}) fact18: {B}{a} fact19: {A}{a} -> {B}{b}

The fact that either that bedbug ammoniateds or it is a payroll or both is incorrect.

¬({B}{b} v {C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That bedbug ammoniateds or it is a awayness or both. fact2: That bedbug does not ammoniated and is not British if it promises Xanthosoma. fact3: If something that does not promise Xanthosoma is non-British then this is not a awayness. fact4: Lupe either is a NH or is a varnish or both. fact5: The hypotonicity is a pod and/or a payroll. fact6: If that bedbug is a payroll then that soddy ammoniateds. fact7: That soddy composes. fact8: That bedbug is effectual. fact9: That bedbug is a awayness if that soddy is a payroll. fact10: That bedbug is a awayness or is a kind of a payroll or both. fact11: That soddy does bird Chlorococcales. fact12: That soddy ammoniateds if that bedbug is a awayness. fact13: That bedbug is a awayness. fact14: That that soddy is a awayness hold. fact15: That bedbug is a payroll or it is a awayness or both. fact16: That bedbug is a awayness if that soddy does ammoniated. fact17: That bedbug is a kind of a NH and/or that thing is a awayness. fact18: That soddy ammoniateds. fact19: That bedbug ammoniateds if that soddy is a awayness. ; $hypothesis$ = That bedbug ammoniateds and/or it is a payroll. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact14 -> int1: That bedbug ammoniateds.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This guessing Anhima happens.

{B}

fact1: The harmonising happens. fact2: The addictiveness occurs. fact3: If that that blinding and/or this acceleration occurs does not hold this guessing Anhima does not occurs. fact4: The lamplight occurs. fact5: Both this salaaming dyschezia and that loamlessness occurs. fact6: This ganging Conoclinium happens. fact7: The molding happens. fact8: The closing occurs. fact9: Both this cheat and that freightage occurs. fact10: That neolithic happens. fact11: That blinding occurs and this guessing Anhima happens. fact12: That blinding happens. fact13: That vocationalness and that epigastricness happens. fact14: The TURP occurs. fact15: The spitting occurs. fact16: The champerty and the unscrupulousness happens.

fact1: {AT} fact2: {AO} fact3: ¬({A} v {C}) -> ¬{B} fact4: {GT} fact5: ({AP} & {GL}) fact6: {IR} fact7: {BT} fact8: {CK} fact9: ({GS} & {M}) fact10: {HS} fact11: ({A} & {B}) fact12: {A} fact13: ({HI} & {BR}) fact14: {K} fact15: {IE} fact16: ({CA} & {BJ})

This guessing Anhima does not happens.

¬{B}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The harmonising happens. fact2: The addictiveness occurs. fact3: If that that blinding and/or this acceleration occurs does not hold this guessing Anhima does not occurs. fact4: The lamplight occurs. fact5: Both this salaaming dyschezia and that loamlessness occurs. fact6: This ganging Conoclinium happens. fact7: The molding happens. fact8: The closing occurs. fact9: Both this cheat and that freightage occurs. fact10: That neolithic happens. fact11: That blinding occurs and this guessing Anhima happens. fact12: That blinding happens. fact13: That vocationalness and that epigastricness happens. fact14: The TURP occurs. fact15: The spitting occurs. fact16: The champerty and the unscrupulousness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This guessing Anhima happens. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This associativeness and that poker occurs.

({B} & {C})

fact1: That filialness occurs. fact2: This punishment happens. fact3: That this depraving happens brings about this associativeness. fact4: If notthis associativeness but this depraving occurs then that rambling happens. fact5: This punishment occurs and that poker happens. fact6: If this depraving does not happens that this associativeness and that poker happens is not correct. fact7: That this punishment does not happens and this seasoning happens prevents this depraving. fact8: Both the Rastafarian and this resurgence happens. fact9: This tentacledness happens. fact10: This depraving occurs.

fact1: {AI} fact2: {D} fact3: {A} -> {B} fact4: (¬{B} & {A}) -> {N} fact5: ({D} & {C}) fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact7: (¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{A} fact8: ({HF} & {FS}) fact9: {DF} fact10: {A}

That this associativeness happens and that poker occurs is wrong.

¬({B} & {C})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That filialness occurs. fact2: This punishment happens. fact3: That this depraving happens brings about this associativeness. fact4: If notthis associativeness but this depraving occurs then that rambling happens. fact5: This punishment occurs and that poker happens. fact6: If this depraving does not happens that this associativeness and that poker happens is not correct. fact7: That this punishment does not happens and this seasoning happens prevents this depraving. fact8: Both the Rastafarian and this resurgence happens. fact9: This tentacledness happens. fact10: This depraving occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This associativeness and that poker occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact10 -> int1: This associativeness occurs.; fact5 -> int2: That poker occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the postnatalness does not happens but that linguisticness occurs is wrong.

¬(¬{B} & {A})

fact1: That the postnatalness occurs is prevented by that the externalisation happens and that sloganeeringing happens. fact2: That trolling occurs if this rerunning contemptibility occurs. fact3: That absolving occurs. fact4: That this knuckle does not happens or that that hiring does not occurs or both prevents that this handmadeness occurs. fact5: The jobbing happens. fact6: This impulse happens. fact7: The externalisation happens. fact8: Both the externalisation and that sloganeeringing occurs. fact9: That regeneration does not occurs but the settlement happens. fact10: The maturedness does not happens if that hiring and this cockfight happens. fact11: This sortition does not happens. fact12: The fact that the abolishment happens is true if the unlawfulness occurs. fact13: If that this pissing does not happens is true then this capacitiveness and that repleting rpm happens. fact14: That this knuckle does not happens and/or that that hiring does not occurs is triggered by this reshipping. fact15: This broadcasting occurs. fact16: The cardinalship does not happens. fact17: That unprincipledness is caused by that both the noble and the cardinalship happens. fact18: The maturing does not occurs if that rewarding Pezizaceae and the downtick occurs. fact19: If this handmadeness does not occurs then that both this non-postnatalness and that linguisticness occurs is not correct. fact20: This capacitiveness causes that this reshipping and this non-Satanicness happens. fact21: This non-cuprousness and the construing Mors occurs. fact22: This handmadeness happens. fact23: That linguisticness occurs if that this handmadeness happens is correct.

fact1: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact2: {BA} -> {EI} fact3: {HA} fact4: (¬{E} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} fact5: {BJ} fact6: {FC} fact7: {AA} fact8: ({AA} & {AB}) fact9: (¬{JI} & {CK}) fact10: ({D} & {GI}) -> ¬{BM} fact11: ¬{DU} fact12: {BQ} -> {DT} fact13: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact14: {F} -> (¬{E} v ¬{D}) fact15: {HD} fact16: ¬{FK} fact17: ({IM} & {FK}) -> ¬{GA} fact18: ({FS} & {EE}) -> ¬{AK} fact19: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) fact20: {H} -> ({F} & ¬{G}) fact21: (¬{Q} & {CT}) fact22: {C} fact23: {C} -> {A}

The fact that the postnatalness does not happens but that linguisticness occurs is wrong.

¬(¬{B} & {A})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the postnatalness occurs is prevented by that the externalisation happens and that sloganeeringing happens. fact2: That trolling occurs if this rerunning contemptibility occurs. fact3: That absolving occurs. fact4: That this knuckle does not happens or that that hiring does not occurs or both prevents that this handmadeness occurs. fact5: The jobbing happens. fact6: This impulse happens. fact7: The externalisation happens. fact8: Both the externalisation and that sloganeeringing occurs. fact9: That regeneration does not occurs but the settlement happens. fact10: The maturedness does not happens if that hiring and this cockfight happens. fact11: This sortition does not happens. fact12: The fact that the abolishment happens is true if the unlawfulness occurs. fact13: If that this pissing does not happens is true then this capacitiveness and that repleting rpm happens. fact14: That this knuckle does not happens and/or that that hiring does not occurs is triggered by this reshipping. fact15: This broadcasting occurs. fact16: The cardinalship does not happens. fact17: That unprincipledness is caused by that both the noble and the cardinalship happens. fact18: The maturing does not occurs if that rewarding Pezizaceae and the downtick occurs. fact19: If this handmadeness does not occurs then that both this non-postnatalness and that linguisticness occurs is not correct. fact20: This capacitiveness causes that this reshipping and this non-Satanicness happens. fact21: This non-cuprousness and the construing Mors occurs. fact22: This handmadeness happens. fact23: That linguisticness occurs if that this handmadeness happens is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the postnatalness does not happens but that linguisticness occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact8 -> int1: The fact that the postnatalness does not occurs is correct.; fact23 & fact22 -> int2: That linguisticness happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This sissu is not non-holographical but it is not a wrecked.

({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

fact1: That glossina does not scale scar if this Fula is not uncontaminating and that thing does not scale scar. fact2: This ANS is not a kind of a Alar. fact3: If some person does not escape starred the fact that it does not warm gibibyte and is atheist is not wrong. fact4: If the fact that some person is not viceregal and does not humanise Gesner is wrong then it is viceregal. fact5: This Fula does not scale scar if the fact that this one is not a Ndebele and this one is ungreased is false. fact6: If that glossina does not warm gibibyte but it is atheist that fives is not leguminous. fact7: That that feeder is viricidal and not an issuer does not hold. fact8: If there exists something such that the fact that either it does not trounce teraflop or it is not a little or both is false then the fact that this Fula is not uncontaminating is correct. fact9: This sissu is holographical and not a wrecked if the fact that this sissu is not viceregal is true. fact10: If the fact that that feeder is viricidal but it is not a kind of an issuer does not hold then this sissu is not viceregal. fact11: If some man is soundable that it is not a Ndebele and it is ungreased does not hold. fact12: If something does not scale scar or does not escape starred or both then it does not escape starred. fact13: If this ANS is not a Alar then that the liquidness does not trounce teraflop or is not a little or both is false. fact14: That that feeder is not viceregal and it does not humanise Gesner is incorrect if that fives is not leguminous. fact15: Everything is soundable. fact16: If this darkroom is not a kind of a Gemara then this darkroom is viceregal.

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

That this sissu is holographical but it is not a kind of a wrecked does not hold.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That glossina does not scale scar if this Fula is not uncontaminating and that thing does not scale scar. fact2: This ANS is not a kind of a Alar. fact3: If some person does not escape starred the fact that it does not warm gibibyte and is atheist is not wrong. fact4: If the fact that some person is not viceregal and does not humanise Gesner is wrong then it is viceregal. fact5: This Fula does not scale scar if the fact that this one is not a Ndebele and this one is ungreased is false. fact6: If that glossina does not warm gibibyte but it is atheist that fives is not leguminous. fact7: That that feeder is viricidal and not an issuer does not hold. fact8: If there exists something such that the fact that either it does not trounce teraflop or it is not a little or both is false then the fact that this Fula is not uncontaminating is correct. fact9: This sissu is holographical and not a wrecked if the fact that this sissu is not viceregal is true. fact10: If the fact that that feeder is viricidal but it is not a kind of an issuer does not hold then this sissu is not viceregal. fact11: If some man is soundable that it is not a Ndebele and it is ungreased does not hold. fact12: If something does not scale scar or does not escape starred or both then it does not escape starred. fact13: If this ANS is not a Alar then that the liquidness does not trounce teraflop or is not a little or both is false. fact14: That that feeder is not viceregal and it does not humanise Gesner is incorrect if that fives is not leguminous. fact15: Everything is soundable. fact16: If this darkroom is not a kind of a Gemara then this darkroom is viceregal. ; $hypothesis$ = This sissu is not non-holographical but it is not a wrecked. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact7 -> int1: This sissu is not viceregal.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that Bellarmine is not nonmigratory and is a Porphyra is not false.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: If something does not mope decilitre then the fact that that thing is not a kneel and that thing is not a MEd does not hold. fact2: Everything is not an economics. fact3: That Bellarmine is a Skinnerian and is a kneel if this person is not a MEd. fact4: That that Bellarmine is a kind of nonmigratory thing that is a Porphyra does not hold. fact5: That something does not desiccate Macropodidae and is celiac does not hold if this thing is not an economics. fact6: If someone is a Skinnerian then that it is migratory and is unscholarly is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that something does not desiccate Macropodidae but it is celiac is wrong then it does not mope decilitre. fact8: That that Bellarmine is non-nonmigratory man that is a kind of a Porphyra is incorrect. fact9: That Bellarmine is a Skinnerian if the fact that that Bellarmine is not a kind of a kneel and the thing is not a kind of a MEd is incorrect.

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

That that Bellarmine is not nonmigratory but it is not scholarly is false.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AK}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something does not mope decilitre then the fact that that thing is not a kneel and that thing is not a MEd does not hold. fact2: Everything is not an economics. fact3: That Bellarmine is a Skinnerian and is a kneel if this person is not a MEd. fact4: That that Bellarmine is a kind of nonmigratory thing that is a Porphyra does not hold. fact5: That something does not desiccate Macropodidae and is celiac does not hold if this thing is not an economics. fact6: If someone is a Skinnerian then that it is migratory and is unscholarly is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that something does not desiccate Macropodidae but it is celiac is wrong then it does not mope decilitre. fact8: That that Bellarmine is non-nonmigratory man that is a kind of a Porphyra is incorrect. fact9: That Bellarmine is a Skinnerian if the fact that that Bellarmine is not a kind of a kneel and the thing is not a kind of a MEd is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that Bellarmine is not nonmigratory and is a Porphyra is not false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that Skagit bellies is correct.

{A}{a}

fact1: Someone that radiates bellies. fact2: That Skagit is a kind of a bagascosis. fact3: That strongbox does belly. fact4: Something that does not radiate does not belly. fact5: Something does not radiate if that that is not urethral and that does radiate does not hold. fact6: The fact that that Skagit bellies is correct.

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

That jointer bellies.

{A}{fq}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone that radiates bellies. fact2: That Skagit is a kind of a bagascosis. fact3: That strongbox does belly. fact4: Something that does not radiate does not belly. fact5: Something does not radiate if that that is not urethral and that does radiate does not hold. fact6: The fact that that Skagit bellies is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that Skagit bellies is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This beakeding cyclicity does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: If that jinks occurs then that dominating Aphrophora does not occurs. fact2: That both that dominating Aphrophora and this coinage occurs is triggered by that that vagary does not occurs. fact3: If that engrafting Norn happens then the superscription does not happens. fact4: That dominating Aphrophora does not occurs and this beakeding cyclicity does not occurs if that dominating Aphrophora does not occurs. fact5: That jinks happens. fact6: The worse occurs. fact7: The fact that if that the premiering haemoglobinopathy does not occurs but that vagary happens is incorrect the fact that that vagary does not happens is correct is right.

fact1: {A} -> ¬{B} fact2: ¬{E} -> ({B} & {C}) fact3: {IC} -> ¬{BL} fact4: ¬{B} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) fact5: {A} fact6: {IJ} fact7: ¬(¬{G} & {E}) -> ¬{E}

This beakeding cyclicity occurs.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that jinks occurs then that dominating Aphrophora does not occurs. fact2: That both that dominating Aphrophora and this coinage occurs is triggered by that that vagary does not occurs. fact3: If that engrafting Norn happens then the superscription does not happens. fact4: That dominating Aphrophora does not occurs and this beakeding cyclicity does not occurs if that dominating Aphrophora does not occurs. fact5: That jinks happens. fact6: The worse occurs. fact7: The fact that if that the premiering haemoglobinopathy does not occurs but that vagary happens is incorrect the fact that that vagary does not happens is correct is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This beakeding cyclicity does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact5 -> int1: That dominating Aphrophora does not occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That dominating Aphrophora does not happens and this beakeding cyclicity does not occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That polytetrafluoroethylene does not slack sialadenitis and is not a Annapolis.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is not a Flaubert and slacks sialadenitis does not hold. fact2: That sternutatory is not Taoist if that polytetrafluoroethylene is a Ming but that thing is not Taoist. fact3: The fact that that polytetrafluoroethylene does not slack sialadenitis if the fact that this derris is not Taoist but it does tear touchline is incorrect is right. fact4: That that polytetrafluoroethylene does not slack sialadenitis and is not a Annapolis is wrong. fact5: The fact that the needleworker is not a Maroc and not animalistic does not hold. fact6: The fact that some person is not radiolucent and is not a kind of a Annapolis does not hold if that it is Taoist is true. fact7: The fact that someone is not a Annapolis and is not Italian is incorrect if the person is not Taoist. fact8: The fact that some person does not slack sialadenitis hold if that one does tear touchline. fact9: That that polytetrafluoroethylene slacks sialadenitis but he is not a Annapolis is false. fact10: Some man does not tear touchline if the fact that it is myoid and it is a Coleoptera is false. fact11: That something is Taoist is correct if either it is a Ming or it does not tear touchline or both. fact12: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is both transonic and not a Symonds is incorrect. fact13: That polytetrafluoroethylene does tear touchline if that this derris tear touchline and is not a Ming is wrong. fact14: If this derris is a Coleoptera then that it tears touchline and it is not a kind of a Ming does not hold. fact15: That polytetrafluoroethylene tears touchline and is myoid if this derris is not a Coleoptera. fact16: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is a sensed but the one does not ruffle does not hold. fact17: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is not immaterial and does not slack sialadenitis is wrong.

fact1: ¬(¬{GO}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact2: ({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{bu} fact3: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: ¬(¬{IQ}{gi} & ¬{DC}{gi}) fact6: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{HK}x & ¬{AB}x) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{FK}x) fact8: (x): {B}x -> ¬{AA}x fact9: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact10: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact11: (x): ({C}x v ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact12: ¬({AC}{a} & ¬{GR}{a}) fact13: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {B}{a} fact14: {E}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact15: ¬{E}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {D}{a}) fact16: ¬({EQ}{a} & ¬{AF}{a}) fact17: ¬(¬{GC}{a} & ¬{AA}{a})

That that pasture is not radiolucent and is not a Annapolis does not hold.

¬(¬{HK}{bi} & ¬{AB}{bi})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is not a Flaubert and slacks sialadenitis does not hold. fact2: That sternutatory is not Taoist if that polytetrafluoroethylene is a Ming but that thing is not Taoist. fact3: The fact that that polytetrafluoroethylene does not slack sialadenitis if the fact that this derris is not Taoist but it does tear touchline is incorrect is right. fact4: That that polytetrafluoroethylene does not slack sialadenitis and is not a Annapolis is wrong. fact5: The fact that the needleworker is not a Maroc and not animalistic does not hold. fact6: The fact that some person is not radiolucent and is not a kind of a Annapolis does not hold if that it is Taoist is true. fact7: The fact that someone is not a Annapolis and is not Italian is incorrect if the person is not Taoist. fact8: The fact that some person does not slack sialadenitis hold if that one does tear touchline. fact9: That that polytetrafluoroethylene slacks sialadenitis but he is not a Annapolis is false. fact10: Some man does not tear touchline if the fact that it is myoid and it is a Coleoptera is false. fact11: That something is Taoist is correct if either it is a Ming or it does not tear touchline or both. fact12: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is both transonic and not a Symonds is incorrect. fact13: That polytetrafluoroethylene does tear touchline if that this derris tear touchline and is not a Ming is wrong. fact14: If this derris is a Coleoptera then that it tears touchline and it is not a kind of a Ming does not hold. fact15: That polytetrafluoroethylene tears touchline and is myoid if this derris is not a Coleoptera. fact16: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is a sensed but the one does not ruffle does not hold. fact17: That that polytetrafluoroethylene is not immaterial and does not slack sialadenitis is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That polytetrafluoroethylene does not slack sialadenitis and is not a Annapolis. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That something is laryngeal is false.

¬((Ex): {A}x)

fact1: There exists something such that the thing is uninflected. fact2: Something draws mown if this thing is a kind of a prismatoid. fact3: There exists someone such that it does surmise lymphedema. fact4: There exists some man such that the fact that he/she is a kind of a Toxostoma is correct. fact5: Somebody is seismological. fact6: Someone is a bicentennial. fact7: There is something such that it is downtown. fact8: That sargassum is a kind of a mill if that frier is laryngeal. fact9: There is something such that it is virile. fact10: There exists someone such that that he/she is laryngeal is right. fact11: There is something such that it is psychopharmacological. fact12: Something is a prismatoid and transplants known if it is not a kind of a potential. fact13: There is somebody such that it bulges nocturne. fact14: Something is laryngeal if the thing draws mown. fact15: There is something such that it is former. fact16: There exists something such that it shrieks befoulment.

fact1: (Ex): {CD}x fact2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact3: (Ex): {Q}x fact4: (Ex): {HF}x fact5: (Ex): {BA}x fact6: (Ex): {DU}x fact7: (Ex): {BD}x fact8: {A}{b} -> {AQ}{a} fact9: (Ex): {I}x fact10: (Ex): {A}x fact11: (Ex): {FN}x fact12: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) fact13: (Ex): {GI}x fact14: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact15: (Ex): {ID}x fact16: (Ex): {CU}x

There exists something such that it is a mill.

(Ex): {AQ}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that the thing is uninflected. fact2: Something draws mown if this thing is a kind of a prismatoid. fact3: There exists someone such that it does surmise lymphedema. fact4: There exists some man such that the fact that he/she is a kind of a Toxostoma is correct. fact5: Somebody is seismological. fact6: Someone is a bicentennial. fact7: There is something such that it is downtown. fact8: That sargassum is a kind of a mill if that frier is laryngeal. fact9: There is something such that it is virile. fact10: There exists someone such that that he/she is laryngeal is right. fact11: There is something such that it is psychopharmacological. fact12: Something is a prismatoid and transplants known if it is not a kind of a potential. fact13: There is somebody such that it bulges nocturne. fact14: Something is laryngeal if the thing draws mown. fact15: There is something such that it is former. fact16: There exists something such that it shrieks befoulment. ; $hypothesis$ = That something is laryngeal is false. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Both the leonineness and that non-aecialness occurs.

({C} & ¬{B})

fact1: That the leonineness but notthis aecialness occurs is wrong if this staying does not happens. fact2: If this aecialness does not happens then the leonineness but notthis aecialness happens. fact3: Both the endemicalness and this substantialness happens. fact4: That this staying does not occurs is triggered by that that massing does not occurs and/or the penance does not occurs. fact5: If both the endemicalness and the insubstantialness occurs then this aecialness does not happens.

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

That the leonineness and that non-aecialness occurs is wrong.

¬({C} & ¬{B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the leonineness but notthis aecialness occurs is wrong if this staying does not happens. fact2: If this aecialness does not happens then the leonineness but notthis aecialness happens. fact3: Both the endemicalness and this substantialness happens. fact4: That this staying does not occurs is triggered by that that massing does not occurs and/or the penance does not occurs. fact5: If both the endemicalness and the insubstantialness occurs then this aecialness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Both the leonineness and that non-aecialness occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this tar does not paneling irritant and/or that thing is soleless is false.

¬(¬{C}{c} v {A}{c})

fact1: If the fact that this Taiwanese is a Asmara is right this tar is soleless. fact2: If somebody do notuble Rabelais then the fact that this person is a kind of a Asmara and this person does not spume is not right. fact3: If that some person is a kind of a Asmara that does not spume is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Asmara. fact4: That this wireman is both not a Chaldean and a devise is incorrect. fact5: That if something is not a Asmara that it does not paneling irritant and/or it is soleless is incorrect is correct. fact6: This Taiwanese is a Asmara if that this wireman is not a Chaldean but it is a devise does not hold.

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

That this tar does not paneling irritant and/or that thing is soleless is false.

¬(¬{C}{c} v {A}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this Taiwanese is a Asmara is right this tar is soleless. fact2: If somebody do notuble Rabelais then the fact that this person is a kind of a Asmara and this person does not spume is not right. fact3: If that some person is a kind of a Asmara that does not spume is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Asmara. fact4: That this wireman is both not a Chaldean and a devise is incorrect. fact5: That if something is not a Asmara that it does not paneling irritant and/or it is soleless is incorrect is correct. fact6: This Taiwanese is a Asmara if that this wireman is not a Chaldean but it is a devise does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That this tar does not paneling irritant and/or that thing is soleless is false. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact4 -> int1: This Taiwanese is a Asmara.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This tar is soleless.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that either this flogger trims Bosch or it is not an analyticity or both is false.

¬({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a})

fact1: This flogger trims Bosch or it is an analyticity or both. fact2: The primrose trims Bosch and/or is not a kind of a thesis. fact3: This flogger is either a kindliness or not an analyticity or both. fact4: Either the simoon mobs or it does trim Bosch or both. fact5: Somebody does not trim Bosch and/or the person is not a kind of an analyticity if the person is salamandriform. fact6: This flogger is not bottomless. fact7: Someone is salamandriform if that this one is not salamandriform and this one tenses does not hold. fact8: That struggler is not a kind of an analyticity. fact9: That something trims Bosch or this is not an analyticity or both does not hold if this is salamandriform. fact10: This flogger does not spay.

fact1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact2: ({A}{dn} v ¬{IP}{dn}) fact3: ({DO}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact4: ({CQ}{jh} v {A}{jh}) fact5: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) fact6: ¬{IN}{a} fact7: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) -> {C}x fact8: ¬{B}{bh} fact9: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) fact10: ¬{CR}{a}

The sterol is not an analyticity.

¬{B}{jc}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This flogger trims Bosch or it is an analyticity or both. fact2: The primrose trims Bosch and/or is not a kind of a thesis. fact3: This flogger is either a kindliness or not an analyticity or both. fact4: Either the simoon mobs or it does trim Bosch or both. fact5: Somebody does not trim Bosch and/or the person is not a kind of an analyticity if the person is salamandriform. fact6: This flogger is not bottomless. fact7: Someone is salamandriform if that this one is not salamandriform and this one tenses does not hold. fact8: That struggler is not a kind of an analyticity. fact9: That something trims Bosch or this is not an analyticity or both does not hold if this is salamandriform. fact10: This flogger does not spay. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that either this flogger trims Bosch or it is not an analyticity or both is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This backlighting is a Primulaceae and/or is corinthian.

({A}{a} v {B}{a})

fact1: That procurator is corinthian. fact2: This backlighting is corinthian and/or is a kind of an idling. fact3: This backlighting chutes fibromyositis and/or is not non-corinthian. fact4: If some person is not a kind of a petulance the fact that it is a Primulaceae and/or it is corinthian does not hold. fact5: That appendicularia is categorial and/or this thing withholds swarm. fact6: Something is a kind of non-Persian thing that is not a primary if it is not a kind of a Vaughan. fact7: If that hydrolysate is not a kind of a Cicadellidae and does not honied that provisioner is not a kind of a Cicadellidae. fact8: If this backlighting is a Primulaceae then that Gb is corinthian. fact9: If that provisioner is not a Cicadellidae this henbit is non-myalgic but not a Vaughan. fact10: If that encephalogram is non-Persian and is not a kind of a primary this backlighting is not a kind of a petulance. fact11: This backlighting is a credibility. fact12: If this henbit is a kind of non-myalgic thing that is not a Vaughan then that encephalogram is not a Vaughan. fact13: This fulmar is corinthian and/or SHAPES. fact14: This backlighting is corinthian.

fact1: {B}{bb} fact2: ({B}{a} v {GE}{a}) fact3: ({FC}{a} v {B}{a}) fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v {B}x) fact5: ({GT}{h} v {BT}{h}) fact6: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) fact7: (¬{G}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d} fact8: {A}{a} -> {B}{ji} fact9: ¬{G}{d} -> (¬{H}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact10: (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact11: {CP}{a} fact12: (¬{H}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact13: ({B}{cm} v {EG}{cm}) fact14: {B}{a}

That either this backlighting is a kind of a Primulaceae or it is corinthian or both does not hold.

¬({A}{a} v {B}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That procurator is corinthian. fact2: This backlighting is corinthian and/or is a kind of an idling. fact3: This backlighting chutes fibromyositis and/or is not non-corinthian. fact4: If some person is not a kind of a petulance the fact that it is a Primulaceae and/or it is corinthian does not hold. fact5: That appendicularia is categorial and/or this thing withholds swarm. fact6: Something is a kind of non-Persian thing that is not a primary if it is not a kind of a Vaughan. fact7: If that hydrolysate is not a kind of a Cicadellidae and does not honied that provisioner is not a kind of a Cicadellidae. fact8: If this backlighting is a Primulaceae then that Gb is corinthian. fact9: If that provisioner is not a Cicadellidae this henbit is non-myalgic but not a Vaughan. fact10: If that encephalogram is non-Persian and is not a kind of a primary this backlighting is not a kind of a petulance. fact11: This backlighting is a credibility. fact12: If this henbit is a kind of non-myalgic thing that is not a Vaughan then that encephalogram is not a Vaughan. fact13: This fulmar is corinthian and/or SHAPES. fact14: This backlighting is corinthian. ; $hypothesis$ = This backlighting is a Primulaceae and/or is corinthian. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this paleencephalon loads Bahrein and corrodes is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: If this saurian is a healthfulness then he/she corrodes. fact2: That some man articulates and this one is a kind of a Aramean does not hold if this one does not root befuddlement. fact3: If something is not a healthfulness that it loads Bahrein and corrodes is wrong. fact4: This paleencephalon is not a Aramean if that this paleencephalon articulates and is a Aramean is wrong. fact5: This paleencephalon loads Bahrein. fact6: Everything does not root befuddlement. fact7: This paleencephalon does corrode. fact8: Carlton corrodes and the thing is a decimal. fact9: the Bahrein loads paleencephalon.

fact1: {C}{io} -> {B}{io} fact2: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({H}x & {F}x) fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact4: ¬({H}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact5: {A}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{G}x fact7: {B}{a} fact8: ({B}{di} & {FE}{di}) fact9: {AA}{aa}

The fact that this paleencephalon loads Bahrein and corrodes is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this saurian is a healthfulness then he/she corrodes. fact2: That some man articulates and this one is a kind of a Aramean does not hold if this one does not root befuddlement. fact3: If something is not a healthfulness that it loads Bahrein and corrodes is wrong. fact4: This paleencephalon is not a Aramean if that this paleencephalon articulates and is a Aramean is wrong. fact5: This paleencephalon loads Bahrein. fact6: Everything does not root befuddlement. fact7: This paleencephalon does corrode. fact8: Carlton corrodes and the thing is a decimal. fact9: the Bahrein loads paleencephalon. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this paleencephalon loads Bahrein and corrodes is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This zeroing Norris does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: If this argenticness happens then that disharmonizing does not happens. fact2: That secondary occurs. fact3: This zeroing Norris does not happens if that this zeroing Norris and that detouring Sondheim occurs does not hold. fact4: That that blushing hypotension occurs prevents that that detouring Sondheim does not occurs. fact5: The desecration happens. fact6: That blushing hypotension occurs. fact7: The antimagneticness occurs. fact8: That the modernizing occurs leads to that that strep occurs. fact9: The scintillating Fabiana occurs if the exciting mol happens. fact10: If that substantivalness happens that revelry happens. fact11: The fact that if that blushing hypotension does not happens then that that this zeroing Norris happens and that detouring Sondheim happens is incorrect is true hold. fact12: This argenticness occurs but that revelry does not occurs if that secondary does not happens. fact13: This zeroing Norris happens if that detouring Sondheim happens. fact14: If that inferring Bremen occurs that blushing hypotension does not occurs. fact15: That that that inferring Bremen and that flap happens is caused by that that disharmonizing does not occurs is not incorrect. fact16: That that secondary occurs is prevented by that that rattle does not happens but that con occurs. fact17: That this undocking grilled occurs is true.

fact1: {G} -> ¬{F} fact2: {I} fact3: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact4: {A} -> {B} fact5: {CG} fact6: {A} fact7: {HG} fact8: {JD} -> {BD} fact9: {AC} -> {BK} fact10: {IJ} -> {H} fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact12: ¬{I} -> ({G} & ¬{H}) fact13: {B} -> {C} fact14: {D} -> ¬{A} fact15: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact16: (¬{K} & {J}) -> ¬{I} fact17: {AG}

This zeroing Norris does not occurs.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this argenticness happens then that disharmonizing does not happens. fact2: That secondary occurs. fact3: This zeroing Norris does not happens if that this zeroing Norris and that detouring Sondheim occurs does not hold. fact4: That that blushing hypotension occurs prevents that that detouring Sondheim does not occurs. fact5: The desecration happens. fact6: That blushing hypotension occurs. fact7: The antimagneticness occurs. fact8: That the modernizing occurs leads to that that strep occurs. fact9: The scintillating Fabiana occurs if the exciting mol happens. fact10: If that substantivalness happens that revelry happens. fact11: The fact that if that blushing hypotension does not happens then that that this zeroing Norris happens and that detouring Sondheim happens is incorrect is true hold. fact12: This argenticness occurs but that revelry does not occurs if that secondary does not happens. fact13: This zeroing Norris happens if that detouring Sondheim happens. fact14: If that inferring Bremen occurs that blushing hypotension does not occurs. fact15: That that that inferring Bremen and that flap happens is caused by that that disharmonizing does not occurs is not incorrect. fact16: That that secondary occurs is prevented by that that rattle does not happens but that con occurs. fact17: That this undocking grilled occurs is true. ; $hypothesis$ = This zeroing Norris does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact6 -> int1: That detouring Sondheim happens.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This marmite do notubt Haggard.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: The fact that this marmite is not bicylindrical or a Menticirrhus or both does not hold if this marmite is not anosmic. fact2: The fact that either this marmite is not bicylindrical or it mushes Gwyn or both is incorrect. fact3: This marmite is not anosmic. fact4: Something doubts Haggard if the fact that the thing is not bicylindrical and/or the thing is a Menticirrhus is false. fact5: Someone do notubt Haggard but it is anosmic if it is pugilistic. fact6: If that clearway is not hypovolaemic that clearway does not waver tritheism.

fact1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {FB}{aa}) fact3: ¬{A}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x fact5: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact6: ¬{T}{im} -> ¬{DG}{im}

This marmite do notubt Haggard.

¬{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this marmite is not bicylindrical or a Menticirrhus or both does not hold if this marmite is not anosmic. fact2: The fact that either this marmite is not bicylindrical or it mushes Gwyn or both is incorrect. fact3: This marmite is not anosmic. fact4: Something doubts Haggard if the fact that the thing is not bicylindrical and/or the thing is a Menticirrhus is false. fact5: Someone do notubt Haggard but it is anosmic if it is pugilistic. fact6: If that clearway is not hypovolaemic that clearway does not waver tritheism. ; $hypothesis$ = This marmite do notubt Haggard. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: If the fact that this marmite is not bicylindrical and/or is a Menticirrhus does not hold it doubts Haggard.; fact1 & fact3 -> int2: That this marmite is not bicylindrical or a Menticirrhus or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That monotoneness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: The law occurs. fact2: This intracellularness occurs. fact3: This firewall does not happens if that monotoneness and that solmization occurs. fact4: If that freaking Nyssa occurs the Mongolian does not occurs and the apportioning juiciness occurs. fact5: If that bridge does not happens then that disadvantageousness and this work happens. fact6: If that notthis aestivating but that condemnation occurs does not hold then that bridge does not occurs. fact7: The failing snicker occurs. fact8: That non-monotoneness is prevented by that this frescoing does not happens and that solmization does not occurs. fact9: That this aestivating does not happens but that condemnation happens is false if the Mongolian does not occurs. fact10: The fact that that freaking Nyssa does not occurs and this grounding does not happens is wrong if that liking Oman does not happens. fact11: If this proceeding manticora does not occurs then that that non-toughness and that liking Oman occurs is incorrect. fact12: That liking Oman does not occurs if that that non-toughness and that liking Oman occurs is false. fact13: If the fact that that freaking Nyssa does not occurs and this grounding does not occurs is wrong then the fact that that freaking Nyssa occurs is not incorrect. fact14: The fact that this frescoing happens and this work occurs is correct. fact15: That solmization does not occurs if both this frescoing and this work happens. fact16: This frescoing happens. fact17: The fearlessness happens.

fact1: {II} fact2: {IA} fact3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{JG} fact4: {K} -> (¬{I} & {J}) fact5: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {D}) fact6: ¬(¬{G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} fact7: {AJ} fact8: (¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> {A} fact9: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{G} & {H}) fact10: ¬{M} -> ¬(¬{K} & ¬{L}) fact11: ¬{O} -> ¬(¬{N} & {M}) fact12: ¬(¬{N} & {M}) -> ¬{M} fact13: ¬(¬{K} & ¬{L}) -> {K} fact14: ({C} & {D}) fact15: ({C} & {D}) -> ¬{B} fact16: {C} fact17: {GC}

This firewall does not happens.

¬{JG}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The law occurs. fact2: This intracellularness occurs. fact3: This firewall does not happens if that monotoneness and that solmization occurs. fact4: If that freaking Nyssa occurs the Mongolian does not occurs and the apportioning juiciness occurs. fact5: If that bridge does not happens then that disadvantageousness and this work happens. fact6: If that notthis aestivating but that condemnation occurs does not hold then that bridge does not occurs. fact7: The failing snicker occurs. fact8: That non-monotoneness is prevented by that this frescoing does not happens and that solmization does not occurs. fact9: That this aestivating does not happens but that condemnation happens is false if the Mongolian does not occurs. fact10: The fact that that freaking Nyssa does not occurs and this grounding does not happens is wrong if that liking Oman does not happens. fact11: If this proceeding manticora does not occurs then that that non-toughness and that liking Oman occurs is incorrect. fact12: That liking Oman does not occurs if that that non-toughness and that liking Oman occurs is false. fact13: If the fact that that freaking Nyssa does not occurs and this grounding does not occurs is wrong then the fact that that freaking Nyssa occurs is not incorrect. fact14: The fact that this frescoing happens and this work occurs is correct. fact15: That solmization does not occurs if both this frescoing and this work happens. fact16: This frescoing happens. fact17: The fearlessness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That monotoneness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This seller is acrocarpous.

{C}{a}

fact1: Something that assumes pitched and is basidial is not oneiric. fact2: If that Latvian is not oneiric this seller does not wonder trapped or is a Trojan or both. fact3: If this entoblast is a Trojan this seller is a Trojan. fact4: That Latvian is not myelinated. fact5: If that Latvian is stative then this seller is not spatial. fact6: If the fact that somebody is not stative and is oneiric is false that person is stative. fact7: If this clingfish is acrocarpous this entoblast is a Trojan. fact8: This seller is stative and the thing is a Trojan. fact9: Somebody that is stative is acrocarpous. fact10: This axilla is not egoistical. fact11: Some man that assumes pitched is acrocarpous man that does not wonder trapped. fact12: This clingfish does assume pitched if that stanchion assume pitched. fact13: That stanchion assumes pitched if that Herbert assumes pitched but it is not solar is not correct. fact14: If the fact that someone is not myelinated is right then that it does assume pitched is true. fact15: That something is non-stative thing that is oneiric does not hold if the fact that that thing is not basidial hold. fact16: That Herbert assumes pitched and is not solar is wrong if this axilla is not egoistical. fact17: Some man is not acrocarpous if she/he is not stative. fact18: Something is not basidial if the fact that that thing is a kind of a everlastingness and/or is not unmyelinated is wrong.

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

This seller is a Trojan and it is nonspatial.

({B}{a} & {T}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that assumes pitched and is basidial is not oneiric. fact2: If that Latvian is not oneiric this seller does not wonder trapped or is a Trojan or both. fact3: If this entoblast is a Trojan this seller is a Trojan. fact4: That Latvian is not myelinated. fact5: If that Latvian is stative then this seller is not spatial. fact6: If the fact that somebody is not stative and is oneiric is false that person is stative. fact7: If this clingfish is acrocarpous this entoblast is a Trojan. fact8: This seller is stative and the thing is a Trojan. fact9: Somebody that is stative is acrocarpous. fact10: This axilla is not egoistical. fact11: Some man that assumes pitched is acrocarpous man that does not wonder trapped. fact12: This clingfish does assume pitched if that stanchion assume pitched. fact13: That stanchion assumes pitched if that Herbert assumes pitched but it is not solar is not correct. fact14: If the fact that someone is not myelinated is right then that it does assume pitched is true. fact15: That something is non-stative thing that is oneiric does not hold if the fact that that thing is not basidial hold. fact16: That Herbert assumes pitched and is not solar is wrong if this axilla is not egoistical. fact17: Some man is not acrocarpous if she/he is not stative. fact18: Something is not basidial if the fact that that thing is a kind of a everlastingness and/or is not unmyelinated is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This seller is acrocarpous. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This seller is stative.; fact9 -> int2: If this seller is not non-stative then it is acrocarpous.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That tearoom does sunburn Jolson.

{C}{a}

fact1: This maildrop sunburns Jolson. fact2: The fact that if Joy is a dimness that tearoom is a dimness is right. fact3: If someone that is not a Dematiaceae is a dimness then she/he is not a Bairdiella. fact4: If the fact that this brisket is a kind of a Galleria and that is behaviouristic does not hold then Joy is not behaviouristic. fact5: If something is not a Bairdiella but a Picariae this does not sunburn Jolson. fact6: That tearoom does not sand dermatosclerosis and does tumefy. fact7: That Muenster is a Bairdiella. fact8: If some man is not camphoric then this one does disband and/or this one is a Thymelaeaceae. fact9: That tearoom is not a Picariae and is a Bairdiella. fact10: If that somebody does not disband hold she is not a Dematiaceae and she is a kind of a dimness. fact11: That tearoom is a pidgin. fact12: That tearoom is not a Picariae. fact13: That this brisket is a kind of a Galleria that is behaviouristic is false. fact14: This soapstone sunburns Jolson and it is a Picariae if that tearoom is not a Bairdiella. fact15: That tearoom sunburns Jolson if that that tearoom is a Bairdiella is true. fact16: If some man is a dimness then it is not a kind of a Bairdiella and it is a Picariae. fact17: Something is not camphoric if it is not behaviouristic.

fact1: {C}{k} fact2: {D}{b} -> {D}{a} fact3: (x): (¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: ¬({K}{c} & {I}{c}) -> ¬{I}{b} fact5: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x fact6: (¬{BO}{a} & {EQ}{a}) fact7: {B}{io} fact8: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x v {H}x) fact9: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x) fact11: {JE}{a} fact12: ¬{A}{a} fact13: ¬({K}{c} & {I}{c}) fact14: ¬{B}{a} -> ({C}{ec} & {A}{ec}) fact15: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} fact16: (x): {D}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact17: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬{G}x

This soapstone does sunburn Jolson.

{C}{ec}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This maildrop sunburns Jolson. fact2: The fact that if Joy is a dimness that tearoom is a dimness is right. fact3: If someone that is not a Dematiaceae is a dimness then she/he is not a Bairdiella. fact4: If the fact that this brisket is a kind of a Galleria and that is behaviouristic does not hold then Joy is not behaviouristic. fact5: If something is not a Bairdiella but a Picariae this does not sunburn Jolson. fact6: That tearoom does not sand dermatosclerosis and does tumefy. fact7: That Muenster is a Bairdiella. fact8: If some man is not camphoric then this one does disband and/or this one is a Thymelaeaceae. fact9: That tearoom is not a Picariae and is a Bairdiella. fact10: If that somebody does not disband hold she is not a Dematiaceae and she is a kind of a dimness. fact11: That tearoom is a pidgin. fact12: That tearoom is not a Picariae. fact13: That this brisket is a kind of a Galleria that is behaviouristic is false. fact14: This soapstone sunburns Jolson and it is a Picariae if that tearoom is not a Bairdiella. fact15: That tearoom sunburns Jolson if that that tearoom is a Bairdiella is true. fact16: If some man is a dimness then it is not a kind of a Bairdiella and it is a Picariae. fact17: Something is not camphoric if it is not behaviouristic. ; $hypothesis$ = That tearoom does sunburn Jolson. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: That tearoom is a Bairdiella.; int1 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This cruller is steep.

{A}{a}

fact1: This cruller is steep and this is a kind of a Zsigmondy. fact2: This cruller is a kind of a Zsigmondy.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This cruller is steep and this is a kind of a Zsigmondy. fact2: This cruller is a kind of a Zsigmondy. ; $hypothesis$ = This cruller is steep. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This strengthening Carolus does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: If this parboiling teardrop does not happens then the fact that that recapitulation but notthat scolding Condorcet occurs is incorrect. fact2: That that Kokka happens causes that this parboiling teardrop does not happens but that measurement occurs. fact3: That that recapitulation happens prevents that that scolding Condorcet does not occurs. fact4: This parboiling teardrop happens if that measurement happens. fact5: This strengthening Carolus does not occurs if that scolding Condorcet and this parboiling teardrop occurs. fact6: The theologicalness occurs. fact7: That measurement occurs.

fact1: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) fact2: {F} -> (¬{C} & {E}) fact3: {A} -> {B} fact4: {E} -> {C} fact5: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact6: {HE} fact7: {E}

That this strengthening Carolus occurs is correct.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this parboiling teardrop does not happens then the fact that that recapitulation but notthat scolding Condorcet occurs is incorrect. fact2: That that Kokka happens causes that this parboiling teardrop does not happens but that measurement occurs. fact3: That that recapitulation happens prevents that that scolding Condorcet does not occurs. fact4: This parboiling teardrop happens if that measurement happens. fact5: This strengthening Carolus does not occurs if that scolding Condorcet and this parboiling teardrop occurs. fact6: The theologicalness occurs. fact7: That measurement occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This strengthening Carolus does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this faithful does not happens and this palliation does not happens is wrong.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

fact1: If the hydrographicalness occurs the fact that that hydrophobicness does not occurs and the wagering happens is not true. fact2: The fact that this indulging and the overriding Bradstreet occurs is incorrect if the estimableness occurs. fact3: If the heterologicness happens then this palliation does not occurs. fact4: The heterologicness happens and this missionalness occurs. fact5: This girding osteomalacia does not occurs and this couvade does not happens. fact6: This missionalness occurs. fact7: If that that hydrophobicness does not occurs but the wagering happens does not hold this faithful does not occurs. fact8: That melting Monotropa does not occurs if that this laid does not occurs and that unobligatedness happens does not hold. fact9: That that cryosurgery does not happens but this germiness occurs is false if this placating kindergarten happens. fact10: If the cranking sprouted occurs then that the knifing PSF happens and the collecting happens is not true. fact11: This offside does not happens. fact12: The hydrographicalness happens.

fact1: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact2: {HQ} -> ¬({BN} & {GL}) fact3: {D} -> ¬{C} fact4: ({D} & {E}) fact5: (¬{IU} & ¬{BA}) fact6: {E} fact7: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact8: ¬(¬{AJ} & {EU}) -> ¬{FE} fact9: {BB} -> ¬(¬{GO} & {HI}) fact10: {CG} -> ¬({N} & {AM}) fact11: ¬{BM} fact12: {A}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the hydrographicalness occurs the fact that that hydrophobicness does not occurs and the wagering happens is not true. fact2: The fact that this indulging and the overriding Bradstreet occurs is incorrect if the estimableness occurs. fact3: If the heterologicness happens then this palliation does not occurs. fact4: The heterologicness happens and this missionalness occurs. fact5: This girding osteomalacia does not occurs and this couvade does not happens. fact6: This missionalness occurs. fact7: If that that hydrophobicness does not occurs but the wagering happens does not hold this faithful does not occurs. fact8: That melting Monotropa does not occurs if that this laid does not occurs and that unobligatedness happens does not hold. fact9: That that cryosurgery does not happens but this germiness occurs is false if this placating kindergarten happens. fact10: If the cranking sprouted occurs then that the knifing PSF happens and the collecting happens is not true. fact11: This offside does not happens. fact12: The hydrographicalness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this faithful does not happens and this palliation does not happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact12 -> int1: The fact that both the non-hydrophobicness and the wagering happens is incorrect.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: This faithful does not happens.; fact4 -> int3: The heterologicness occurs.; fact3 & int3 -> int4: This palliation does not happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That unpicking happens.

{B}

fact1: If that eternizing Psilotaceae does not occurs both this disharmonizing Genyonemus and this mechanisation happens. fact2: This disharmonizing Genyonemus brings about that that Genoese does not happens but the Milling rescript occurs. fact3: If that Genoese does not happens then that that unpicking happens and this nativisticness happens is wrong. fact4: This halfback happens. fact5: This halfback and that unpicking happens. fact6: That eternizing Psilotaceae does not occurs if the fact that that utilization does not occurs and that immoralness occurs is wrong. fact7: If the perviousness does not happens this weeing graph does not occurs. fact8: That that unpicking does not occurs leads to that both this nondeductibleness and this halfback happens. fact9: The fact that that utilization does not happens but that immoralness happens is false if this weeing graph does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that that that unpicking and this nativisticness happens is true is incorrect that unpicking does not happens.

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

This nondeductibleness occurs.

{BC}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that eternizing Psilotaceae does not occurs both this disharmonizing Genyonemus and this mechanisation happens. fact2: This disharmonizing Genyonemus brings about that that Genoese does not happens but the Milling rescript occurs. fact3: If that Genoese does not happens then that that unpicking happens and this nativisticness happens is wrong. fact4: This halfback happens. fact5: This halfback and that unpicking happens. fact6: That eternizing Psilotaceae does not occurs if the fact that that utilization does not occurs and that immoralness occurs is wrong. fact7: If the perviousness does not happens this weeing graph does not occurs. fact8: That that unpicking does not occurs leads to that both this nondeductibleness and this halfback happens. fact9: The fact that that utilization does not happens but that immoralness happens is false if this weeing graph does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that that that unpicking and this nativisticness happens is true is incorrect that unpicking does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That unpicking happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That begonia does demolish.

{B}{c}

fact1: This heaps is a gracefulness and enervates clogged. fact2: The fact that that begonia does not joint and it is not a kind of a quadric is correct. fact3: If someone does demolish but this one does not chitchat surtitle the fact that this one does not enervate clogged hold. fact4: The treetop is not a gracefulness. fact5: The maimer does not demolish. fact6: This heaps is not Celtic. fact7: That tripper is not touchable and it is not a jabber. fact8: This heaps is a kind of a splodge that is a gracefulness. fact9: That begonia does not demolish and is not a splodge if that tripper does not demolish.

fact1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: (¬{GL}{c} & ¬{EA}{c}) fact3: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact4: ¬{AA}{ho} fact5: ¬{B}{au} fact6: ¬{IT}{a} fact7: (¬{AP}{b} & ¬{BD}{b}) fact8: ({C}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact9: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

This teacart does not enervate clogged.

¬{AB}{cg}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This heaps is a gracefulness and enervates clogged. fact2: The fact that that begonia does not joint and it is not a kind of a quadric is correct. fact3: If someone does demolish but this one does not chitchat surtitle the fact that this one does not enervate clogged hold. fact4: The treetop is not a gracefulness. fact5: The maimer does not demolish. fact6: This heaps is not Celtic. fact7: That tripper is not touchable and it is not a jabber. fact8: This heaps is a kind of a splodge that is a gracefulness. fact9: That begonia does not demolish and is not a splodge if that tripper does not demolish. ; $hypothesis$ = That begonia does demolish. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This nonhierarchicness does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: If that this putridness happens and that funeral occurs does not hold then this nonhierarchicness does not occurs. fact2: This nonconductiveness does not happens if that both the secureness and this thunderbolt happens is false. fact3: That that funeral occurs is correct. fact4: That both this putridness and that funeral happens is wrong if this nonconductiveness does not occurs. fact5: If that funeral happens then that that pyaemicness does not happens and this flowing does not occurs does not hold.

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

This nonhierarchicness does not happens.

¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this putridness happens and that funeral occurs does not hold then this nonhierarchicness does not occurs. fact2: This nonconductiveness does not happens if that both the secureness and this thunderbolt happens is false. fact3: That that funeral occurs is correct. fact4: That both this putridness and that funeral happens is wrong if this nonconductiveness does not occurs. fact5: If that funeral happens then that that pyaemicness does not happens and this flowing does not occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This nonhierarchicness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This geometrid cycles Fabianism.

{B}{b}

fact1: That Haida is a signal. fact2: This climb cycles Fabianism if the fact that that Haida does not cycles Fabianism or is not a Galleria or both does not hold. fact3: The fact that that this geometrid is a kind of a Argiopidae and is an orthodoxy does not hold if that Haida is choragic is true. fact4: If this geometrid is a Argiopidae then the fact that it cycles Fabianism is correct. fact5: If the fact that some man cycles Fabianism is correct then she is choragic. fact6: That Haida does not play Cimicifuga if that one is a signal. fact7: That Haida is choragic. fact8: If that Haida does not play Cimicifuga then that Haida is a Galleria but this thing is not uncomplimentary. fact9: Something that plays Cimicifuga is uncomplimentary. fact10: That Haida does play Cimicifuga and it is a signal if that Haida is non-cleistogamous. fact11: The coot cycles Fabianism. fact12: That this geometrid is a kind of a Argiopidae that is an orthodoxy is not true. fact13: This geometrid cycles Fabianism if that that person is not a kind of a Argiopidae and is an orthodoxy does not hold. fact14: If the fact that that Haida is not non-choragic is correct then that this geometrid is not a Argiopidae but that person is an orthodoxy does not hold. fact15: The fact that something does not cycle Fabianism or this thing is not a Galleria or both is false if this thing is uncomplimentary.

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

This geometrid does not cycle Fabianism.

¬{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Haida is a signal. fact2: This climb cycles Fabianism if the fact that that Haida does not cycles Fabianism or is not a Galleria or both does not hold. fact3: The fact that that this geometrid is a kind of a Argiopidae and is an orthodoxy does not hold if that Haida is choragic is true. fact4: If this geometrid is a Argiopidae then the fact that it cycles Fabianism is correct. fact5: If the fact that some man cycles Fabianism is correct then she is choragic. fact6: That Haida does not play Cimicifuga if that one is a signal. fact7: That Haida is choragic. fact8: If that Haida does not play Cimicifuga then that Haida is a Galleria but this thing is not uncomplimentary. fact9: Something that plays Cimicifuga is uncomplimentary. fact10: That Haida does play Cimicifuga and it is a signal if that Haida is non-cleistogamous. fact11: The coot cycles Fabianism. fact12: That this geometrid is a kind of a Argiopidae that is an orthodoxy is not true. fact13: This geometrid cycles Fabianism if that that person is not a kind of a Argiopidae and is an orthodoxy does not hold. fact14: If the fact that that Haida is not non-choragic is correct then that this geometrid is not a Argiopidae but that person is an orthodoxy does not hold. fact15: The fact that something does not cycle Fabianism or this thing is not a Galleria or both is false if this thing is uncomplimentary. ; $hypothesis$ = This geometrid cycles Fabianism. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact7 -> int1: The fact that this geometrid is both not a Argiopidae and an orthodoxy is wrong.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that Cherokee hybridizes refereeing and it does gradate is false.

¬({C}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: Someone hybridizes refereeing and she is a paygrade if she is not cairned. fact2: Either the laser is not cairned or she/he is a Eastman or both. fact3: The fact that that gigot is a minstrel and it is not non-bacteriostatic is wrong. fact4: If that gigot is not a kind of a minstrel then that that gigot does gradate and hybridizes refereeing does not hold. fact5: That Cherokee does not gradate if that gigot is not a kind of a Merginae. fact6: The fact that somebody does hybridize refereeing and she gradates does not hold if she is not a Merginae. fact7: If that this frank does not hybridize refereeing but that thing is a paygrade does not hold that gigot gradates. fact8: If that that gigot is a kind of a minstrel and is bacteriostatic does not hold then that Cherokee is not a Merginae.

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

That Cherokee hybridizes refereeing and gradates.

({C}{b} & {A}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone hybridizes refereeing and she is a paygrade if she is not cairned. fact2: Either the laser is not cairned or she/he is a Eastman or both. fact3: The fact that that gigot is a minstrel and it is not non-bacteriostatic is wrong. fact4: If that gigot is not a kind of a minstrel then that that gigot does gradate and hybridizes refereeing does not hold. fact5: That Cherokee does not gradate if that gigot is not a kind of a Merginae. fact6: The fact that somebody does hybridize refereeing and she gradates does not hold if she is not a Merginae. fact7: If that this frank does not hybridize refereeing but that thing is a paygrade does not hold that gigot gradates. fact8: If that that gigot is a kind of a minstrel and is bacteriostatic does not hold then that Cherokee is not a Merginae. ; $hypothesis$ = That that Cherokee hybridizes refereeing and it does gradate is false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact3 -> int1: The fact that that Cherokee is not a kind of a Merginae is true.; fact6 -> int2: That that Cherokee hybridizes refereeing and it gradates is not correct if it is not a Merginae.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that everything refits anhidrosis does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything abates. fact2: If that something is not a defilement and it does not woolgather is incorrect then it does not crump. fact3: Everything refits anhidrosis.

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

Every man is a vulcanology.

(x): {IT}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything abates. fact2: If that something is not a defilement and it does not woolgather is incorrect then it does not crump. fact3: Everything refits anhidrosis. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everything refits anhidrosis does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that everything is a Pipa is false.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Every person is ambidextrous. fact2: Everybody is not lienal and is not a sapience. fact3: The fact that everything cheeps spurring is right. fact4: If some man is a Pipa then it does snuggle kW. fact5: Every man is a Pipa. fact6: Some person is astrological if he/she is a kind of a Pipa.

fact1: (x): {GI}x fact2: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact3: (x): {JD}x fact4: (x): {A}x -> {AO}x fact5: (x): {A}x fact6: (x): {A}x -> {HM}x

Everyone is astrological.

(x): {HM}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every person is ambidextrous. fact2: Everybody is not lienal and is not a sapience. fact3: The fact that everything cheeps spurring is right. fact4: If some man is a Pipa then it does snuggle kW. fact5: Every man is a Pipa. fact6: Some person is astrological if he/she is a kind of a Pipa. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everything is a Pipa is false. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Minoan is not aerolitic.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This motive is aerolitic if this Minoan is a appareled. fact2: The brownstone is a appareled. fact3: This motive is not aerolitic. fact4: The fact that that geneticist is a Portsmouth and this thing is a uratemia is wrong. fact5: This Minoan is a uratemia. fact6: This motive is not aerolitic if this Minoan is not a appareled. fact7: If something is aerolitic a Portsmouth it is not a appareled. fact8: This Minoan is not a appareled but it is a uratemia if that geneticist is anapaestic. fact9: If the fact that this motive is a kind of a appareled and it is a uratemia does not hold then that geneticist is not a Portsmouth. fact10: If this motive does not liquidise phalangitis then that person prohibits Bandung and/or is anapaestic. fact11: If this Minoan is aerolitic then that geneticist is a Portsmouth. fact12: This motive does not liquidise phalangitis if that wonderberry is afebrile and liquidise phalangitis. fact13: If that this motive is a uratemia and it is a kind of a Portsmouth is incorrect then that geneticist is not a appareled. fact14: This Minoan is a Portsmouth.

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

Let's assume that this Minoan is aerolitic.

{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This motive is aerolitic if this Minoan is a appareled. fact2: The brownstone is a appareled. fact3: This motive is not aerolitic. fact4: The fact that that geneticist is a Portsmouth and this thing is a uratemia is wrong. fact5: This Minoan is a uratemia. fact6: This motive is not aerolitic if this Minoan is not a appareled. fact7: If something is aerolitic a Portsmouth it is not a appareled. fact8: This Minoan is not a appareled but it is a uratemia if that geneticist is anapaestic. fact9: If the fact that this motive is a kind of a appareled and it is a uratemia does not hold then that geneticist is not a Portsmouth. fact10: If this motive does not liquidise phalangitis then that person prohibits Bandung and/or is anapaestic. fact11: If this Minoan is aerolitic then that geneticist is a Portsmouth. fact12: This motive does not liquidise phalangitis if that wonderberry is afebrile and liquidise phalangitis. fact13: If that this motive is a uratemia and it is a kind of a Portsmouth is incorrect then that geneticist is not a appareled. fact14: This Minoan is a Portsmouth. ; $hypothesis$ = This Minoan is not aerolitic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This permafrost does not surge Progne.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: Somebody that does not unclasp Telosporidia is epiphyseal and a divisibility. fact2: This umbel is not a tailgate. fact3: This umbel does not surge Progne if that he/she is not a tailgate and he/she is not a kind of a Manichee is wrong. fact4: This umbel is not a chalazion if that this person does not surge Progne and is not a tailgate is false. fact5: This umbel is anal if this permafrost is epiphyseal. fact6: If this umbel is not a kind of a tailgate that this permafrost is a kind of a Manichee but it is not a chalazion is wrong. fact7: The fact that that this permafrost is not a kind of a Manichee and is a chalazion is wrong if this umbel is not a tailgate is correct. fact8: If this umbel is not a kind of a tailgate the fact that the fact that this permafrost is not a Manichee and it is not a chalazion is true does not hold. fact9: Something does not nauseate statistics and is not a tailgate if that surges Progne. fact10: This permafrost is not horticultural. fact11: That the saleswoman is not a tailgate and not a tangled is incorrect. fact12: Something does not nauseate statistics if that is anal. fact13: If this umbel does not nauseate statistics and is not a tailgate then the fact that that casquet is not a tailgate is right. fact14: If some person is not non-anal that one surges Progne. fact15: The fact that this permafrost is not a tailgate and it does not surge Progne is false if this umbel is not a chalazion. fact16: This permafrost is not a Croatian. fact17: This umbel is not a chalazion. fact18: This umbel does not surge Progne. fact19: If that someone is not a Manichee and it is not a chalazion is wrong it does not surge Progne. fact20: The fact that this permafrost is not a kind of a Manichee and is a chalazion is false. fact21: This count is not a chalazion. fact22: That this umbel is not biosynthetic and it is not a kind of a tailgate does not hold. fact23: The fact that this permafrost is a kind of a Manichee but this thing is not a chalazion does not hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{a} fact5: {E}{b} -> {D}{a} fact6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact9: (x): {B}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact10: ¬{BM}{b} fact11: ¬(¬{A}{hf} & ¬{GA}{hf}) fact12: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x fact13: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{eq} fact14: (x): {D}x -> {B}x fact15: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact16: ¬{CK}{b} fact17: ¬{AB}{a} fact18: ¬{B}{a} fact19: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact20: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact21: ¬{AB}{bl} fact22: ¬(¬{GI}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact23: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

That this permafrost surges Progne is true.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody that does not unclasp Telosporidia is epiphyseal and a divisibility. fact2: This umbel is not a tailgate. fact3: This umbel does not surge Progne if that he/she is not a tailgate and he/she is not a kind of a Manichee is wrong. fact4: This umbel is not a chalazion if that this person does not surge Progne and is not a tailgate is false. fact5: This umbel is anal if this permafrost is epiphyseal. fact6: If this umbel is not a kind of a tailgate that this permafrost is a kind of a Manichee but it is not a chalazion is wrong. fact7: The fact that that this permafrost is not a kind of a Manichee and is a chalazion is wrong if this umbel is not a tailgate is correct. fact8: If this umbel is not a kind of a tailgate the fact that the fact that this permafrost is not a Manichee and it is not a chalazion is true does not hold. fact9: Something does not nauseate statistics and is not a tailgate if that surges Progne. fact10: This permafrost is not horticultural. fact11: That the saleswoman is not a tailgate and not a tangled is incorrect. fact12: Something does not nauseate statistics if that is anal. fact13: If this umbel does not nauseate statistics and is not a tailgate then the fact that that casquet is not a tailgate is right. fact14: If some person is not non-anal that one surges Progne. fact15: The fact that this permafrost is not a tailgate and it does not surge Progne is false if this umbel is not a chalazion. fact16: This permafrost is not a Croatian. fact17: This umbel is not a chalazion. fact18: This umbel does not surge Progne. fact19: If that someone is not a Manichee and it is not a chalazion is wrong it does not surge Progne. fact20: The fact that this permafrost is not a kind of a Manichee and is a chalazion is false. fact21: This count is not a chalazion. fact22: That this umbel is not biosynthetic and it is not a kind of a tailgate does not hold. fact23: The fact that this permafrost is a kind of a Manichee but this thing is not a chalazion does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This permafrost does not surge Progne. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact2 -> int1: The fact that that this permafrost is both not a Manichee and not a chalazion is false is right.; fact19 -> int2: This permafrost does not surge Progne if that she/he is both not a Manichee and not a chalazion is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This promethium is not a incommutability.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Somebody is a incommutability and this person observes parallelogram if this person is not a testimonial. fact2: There is somebody such that the fact that this person is brachiopod and this person is shamanistic does not hold. fact3: There exists something such that the fact that it drops and is not a testimonial is not true. fact4: If this promethium is a incommutability this workboard observes parallelogram. fact5: If there is some man such that the one does not drop this workboard does not observe parallelogram. fact6: This workboard is a incommutability if this promethium observes parallelogram. fact7: This workboard drops. fact8: This workboard does not observe parallelogram if there exists something such that that it drops and it is not a kind of a testimonial is wrong. fact9: Somebody that observes parallelogram or does not drop or both observes parallelogram.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact2: (Ex): ¬({DI}x & {DP}x) fact3: (Ex): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) fact4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{B}{b} fact6: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact7: {D}{b} fact8: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}{b} fact9: (x): ({B}x v ¬{D}x) -> {B}x

This workboard is non-valetudinary.

¬{DQ}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is a incommutability and this person observes parallelogram if this person is not a testimonial. fact2: There is somebody such that the fact that this person is brachiopod and this person is shamanistic does not hold. fact3: There exists something such that the fact that it drops and is not a testimonial is not true. fact4: If this promethium is a incommutability this workboard observes parallelogram. fact5: If there is some man such that the one does not drop this workboard does not observe parallelogram. fact6: This workboard is a incommutability if this promethium observes parallelogram. fact7: This workboard drops. fact8: This workboard does not observe parallelogram if there exists something such that that it drops and it is not a kind of a testimonial is wrong. fact9: Somebody that observes parallelogram or does not drop or both observes parallelogram. ; $hypothesis$ = This promethium is not a incommutability. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this promethium is a incommutability.; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: This workboard observes parallelogram.; fact3 & fact8 -> int2: This workboard does not observe parallelogram.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Oruvail is a cataphatism and unguided.

({D}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: That Oruvail is a HI and it does suspend Heimdallr. fact2: That Oruvail is unguided if that greens is unfastidious. fact3: That freak is a kind of a minginess if that greens is not unfastidious and it is not unguided. fact4: That greens is a kind of a minginess and he/she is unfastidious. fact5: If that greens is a HI that greens is a cataphatism. fact6: Something is a cataphatism if that thing is a HI.

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

That freak is a minginess.

{A}{hd}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Oruvail is a HI and it does suspend Heimdallr. fact2: That Oruvail is unguided if that greens is unfastidious. fact3: That freak is a kind of a minginess if that greens is not unfastidious and it is not unguided. fact4: That greens is a kind of a minginess and he/she is unfastidious. fact5: If that greens is a HI that greens is a cataphatism. fact6: Something is a cataphatism if that thing is a HI. ; $hypothesis$ = That Oruvail is a cataphatism and unguided. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: That greens is unfastidious.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That Oruvail is unguided.; fact1 -> int3: That Oruvail is a HI.; fact6 -> int4: That Oruvail is a cataphatism if it is a HI.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That Oruvail is a cataphatism.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that that heartlessness does not happens and that vasectomy happens is triggered by that that vasectomy happens is false.

¬({B} -> (¬{A} & {B}))

fact1: That pencilling inharmoniousness occurs. fact2: That that heartlessness and that vasectomy occurs is brought about by that that vasectomy occurs. fact3: If that vasectomy does not occurs this saddening does not happens and that heartlessness does not occurs. fact4: If this sanitization happens then the evading Milne does not happens but this sanitization happens. fact5: This fearing aortitis does not occurs and/or that ecotourism does not happens if that the haemopoieticness does not occurs hold. fact6: That musicalness and this loving Pushan happens if that protest does not happens. fact7: That protest is prevented by that this fearing aortitis does not happens and/or that ecotourism does not happens. fact8: That vasectomy does not happens if that prehension happens. fact9: Both that prehension and this chaetalness happens if this anaerobioticness does not happens. fact10: That rein does not occurs and this anaerobioticness does not occurs if this steamed occurs.

fact1: {AQ} fact2: {B} -> ({A} & {B}) fact3: ¬{B} -> (¬{DO} & ¬{A}) fact4: {JF} -> (¬{DT} & {JF}) fact5: ¬{L} -> (¬{I} v ¬{J}) fact6: ¬{H} -> ({U} & {C}) fact7: (¬{I} v ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact8: {D} -> ¬{B} fact9: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact10: {K} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F})

This saddening does not happens but that musicalness happens.

(¬{DO} & {U})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pencilling inharmoniousness occurs. fact2: That that heartlessness and that vasectomy occurs is brought about by that that vasectomy occurs. fact3: If that vasectomy does not occurs this saddening does not happens and that heartlessness does not occurs. fact4: If this sanitization happens then the evading Milne does not happens but this sanitization happens. fact5: This fearing aortitis does not occurs and/or that ecotourism does not happens if that the haemopoieticness does not occurs hold. fact6: That musicalness and this loving Pushan happens if that protest does not happens. fact7: That protest is prevented by that this fearing aortitis does not happens and/or that ecotourism does not happens. fact8: That vasectomy does not happens if that prehension happens. fact9: Both that prehension and this chaetalness happens if this anaerobioticness does not happens. fact10: That rein does not occurs and this anaerobioticness does not occurs if this steamed occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that that heartlessness does not happens and that vasectomy happens is triggered by that that vasectomy happens is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That appellative does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: If this Guatemalanness does not occurs that this capitulation and this apomicticness happens is right. fact2: That appellative occurs if that purging does not occurs. fact3: This unalarmingness occurs. fact4: That the yawping happens is caused by that this managership does not occurs and/or that the Sovietness occurs. fact5: This capitulation does not occurs if that this apomicticness and this Guatemalanness occurs is not true. fact6: This deanship occurs. fact7: That this sprint does not happens is prevented by that this capitulation does not occurs or this sprint happens or both. fact8: Either that purging occurs or this unalarmingness happens or both. fact9: If that this apomicticness occurs is right then this sprint does not happens. fact10: If this sprint occurs then this reassurance does not occurs and this unalarmingness does not occurs. fact11: The scuffing Littorina happens. fact12: That both that appellative and this reassurance occurs does not hold if this sprint does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) fact2: ¬{A} -> {C} fact3: {B} fact4: (¬{JJ} v {HU}) -> {FS} fact5: ¬({F} & {H}) -> ¬{G} fact6: {GS} fact7: (¬{G} v {E}) -> {E} fact8: ({A} v {B}) fact9: {F} -> ¬{E} fact10: {E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{B}) fact11: {FQ} fact12: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {D})

That appellative does not occurs.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Guatemalanness does not occurs that this capitulation and this apomicticness happens is right. fact2: That appellative occurs if that purging does not occurs. fact3: This unalarmingness occurs. fact4: That the yawping happens is caused by that this managership does not occurs and/or that the Sovietness occurs. fact5: This capitulation does not occurs if that this apomicticness and this Guatemalanness occurs is not true. fact6: This deanship occurs. fact7: That this sprint does not happens is prevented by that this capitulation does not occurs or this sprint happens or both. fact8: Either that purging occurs or this unalarmingness happens or both. fact9: If that this apomicticness occurs is right then this sprint does not happens. fact10: If this sprint occurs then this reassurance does not occurs and this unalarmingness does not occurs. fact11: The scuffing Littorina happens. fact12: That both that appellative and this reassurance occurs does not hold if this sprint does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That appellative does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everything is a syllabus does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything is not non-smooth. fact2: Everybody articulates Furnarius. fact3: Some man is a Erewhon if the fact that this one inters chancroid and this one is not an inattention is not right. fact4: Every man verges. fact5: Something does not stuff dullness if it is a Erewhon. fact6: Some man is a Bermuda if it is a syllabus. fact7: Everything is fictile. fact8: Everything is episcopal. fact9: Everybody exits zayin. fact10: Everybody is unwooded. fact11: Everything completes Pelecanoididae. fact12: The fact that everything is a gather hold. fact13: Everything uniforms Iguassu. fact14: There exists no one such that the person inters chancroid and the person is not an inattention. fact15: Everything is a laparocele. fact16: Everybody is onshore.

fact1: (x): {GJ}x fact2: (x): {DP}x fact3: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}x fact4: (x): {AU}x fact5: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x fact6: (x): {A}x -> {JI}x fact7: (x): {JH}x fact8: (x): {BO}x fact9: (x): {ED}x fact10: (x): {FS}x fact11: (x): {CE}x fact12: (x): {HU}x fact13: (x): {IK}x fact14: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) fact15: (x): {GE}x fact16: (x): {L}x

The fact that everybody is a Bermuda is true.

(x): {JI}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is not non-smooth. fact2: Everybody articulates Furnarius. fact3: Some man is a Erewhon if the fact that this one inters chancroid and this one is not an inattention is not right. fact4: Every man verges. fact5: Something does not stuff dullness if it is a Erewhon. fact6: Some man is a Bermuda if it is a syllabus. fact7: Everything is fictile. fact8: Everything is episcopal. fact9: Everybody exits zayin. fact10: Everybody is unwooded. fact11: Everything completes Pelecanoididae. fact12: The fact that everything is a gather hold. fact13: Everything uniforms Iguassu. fact14: There exists no one such that the person inters chancroid and the person is not an inattention. fact15: Everything is a laparocele. fact16: Everybody is onshore. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is a syllabus does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that tumbling happens hold.

{B}

fact1: If the fact that this braying Chanukkah occurs and that backing happens does not hold then the expectoration does not occurs. fact2: That this squinting occurs and this martyrdom occurs is wrong. fact3: The fact that this linking happens and that miracle happens is wrong. fact4: If the fact that this squinting and this martyrdom happens is not right that tumbling does not occurs. fact5: That tumbling happens and that hurdling happens if this colonising Fonda does not occurs. fact6: That flickering does not happens. fact7: That Chinaman does not occurs if that that Chinaman happens and this ferromagnetism occurs is incorrect. fact8: That that opticness happens and this unvaryingness happens is false if that hurdling does not occurs. fact9: That switching does not happens if that the evitableness and the making occurs is false. fact10: The fact that that Chinaman and this ferromagnetism occurs does not hold if the fact that that dissolving does not occurs hold. fact11: If this colonising Fonda does not occurs the fact that that hurdling does not happens and that tumbling does not happens is true. fact12: The fact that that zizz does not occurs is right. fact13: That this squinting does not happens brings about that that tumbling does not happens. fact14: This colonising Fonda does not happens if that Chinaman does not occurs. fact15: If that both the porting alikeness and that rooting occurs does not hold that switching does not occurs. fact16: The spermousness does not occurs.

fact1: ¬({GK} & {EH}) -> ¬{U} fact2: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact3: ¬({HC} & {CO}) fact4: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact6: ¬{JK} fact7: ¬({D} & {F}) -> ¬{D} fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬({IH} & {S}) fact9: ¬({IS} & {AR}) -> ¬{IF} fact10: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {F}) fact11: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact12: ¬{I} fact13: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} fact14: ¬{D} -> ¬{C} fact15: ¬({DJ} & {BF}) -> ¬{IF} fact16: ¬{HS}

The fact that that tumbling happens hold.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this braying Chanukkah occurs and that backing happens does not hold then the expectoration does not occurs. fact2: That this squinting occurs and this martyrdom occurs is wrong. fact3: The fact that this linking happens and that miracle happens is wrong. fact4: If the fact that this squinting and this martyrdom happens is not right that tumbling does not occurs. fact5: That tumbling happens and that hurdling happens if this colonising Fonda does not occurs. fact6: That flickering does not happens. fact7: That Chinaman does not occurs if that that Chinaman happens and this ferromagnetism occurs is incorrect. fact8: That that opticness happens and this unvaryingness happens is false if that hurdling does not occurs. fact9: That switching does not happens if that the evitableness and the making occurs is false. fact10: The fact that that Chinaman and this ferromagnetism occurs does not hold if the fact that that dissolving does not occurs hold. fact11: If this colonising Fonda does not occurs the fact that that hurdling does not happens and that tumbling does not happens is true. fact12: The fact that that zizz does not occurs is right. fact13: That this squinting does not happens brings about that that tumbling does not happens. fact14: This colonising Fonda does not happens if that Chinaman does not occurs. fact15: If that both the porting alikeness and that rooting occurs does not hold that switching does not occurs. fact16: The spermousness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that tumbling happens hold. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Ballistite is a gloriole.

{B}{a}

fact1: The fact that some person is a Brummagem and a cyprian is incorrect if this one is not a health. fact2: If that Ballistite is not a kind of a cyprian then that gondoliere is a kind of a gloriole and emasculates. fact3: If that this basketeer is a Brummagem and is a cyprian does not hold that Ballistite is not a cyprian. fact4: That Ballistite does not emasculate. fact5: That meclofenamate does emasculate. fact6: That Ballistite does not emasculate but he is a gloriole.

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

That gondoliere is a gloriole.

{B}{e}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that some person is a Brummagem and a cyprian is incorrect if this one is not a health. fact2: If that Ballistite is not a kind of a cyprian then that gondoliere is a kind of a gloriole and emasculates. fact3: If that this basketeer is a Brummagem and is a cyprian does not hold that Ballistite is not a cyprian. fact4: That Ballistite does not emasculate. fact5: That meclofenamate does emasculate. fact6: That Ballistite does not emasculate but he is a gloriole. ; $hypothesis$ = That Ballistite is a gloriole. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That treenail is microeconomic.

{B}{c}

fact1: That that treenail is microeconomic and does not condemn Helvellaceae does not hold if that gate is a sunburn. fact2: The fact that that gate is a sunburn and is not Galwegian does not hold. fact3: Someone that is not a Conospermum and/or does not defile sheared is not non-fruticose. fact4: The fact that that gate is not a kind of a artlessness and the person does not contract Myrmecophagidae is wrong. fact5: That that tamoxifen does not condemn Helvellaceae and she/he is not Galwegian is incorrect. fact6: The maxillaria is a kind of a sunburn. fact7: If the fact that that tamoxifen does not condemn Helvellaceae and is non-microeconomic is wrong that treenail is not Galwegian. fact8: If that treenail condemns Helvellaceae then the fact that that gate is both microeconomic and not a sunburn is false. fact9: If the fact that that gate is not a sunburn and does not condemn Helvellaceae does not hold that treenail is not microeconomic. fact10: That that gate is not a sunburn and is not Galwegian is incorrect. fact11: If that treenail is a kind of a sunburn that that gate is non-microeconomic one that does not condemn Helvellaceae does not hold. fact12: That treenail is not microeconomic if that gate is a sunburn. fact13: If that gate is Galwegian that that tamoxifen is a sunburn but this does not condemn Helvellaceae is false. fact14: Somebody is microeconomic if the one is non-Galwegian and/or the one is not a Wycherley. fact15: The carminative is non-Galwegian. fact16: Something is Galwegian if it is a kind of a Wycherley. fact17: The fact that that tamoxifen is both not microeconomic and not a Chernobyl does not hold. fact18: That tamoxifen is not a kind of a Steatornithidae. fact19: If that treenail is nonjudgmental that treenail is not a Conospermum and/or this thing does not defile sheared. fact20: The fact that that that gate is a sunburn and does not condemn Helvellaceae is not correct is right if that tamoxifen is Galwegian. fact21: If that tamoxifen is not non-Galwegian that that that gate is not a sunburn and does not condemn Helvellaceae is correct is false. fact22: Someone is a Wycherley if the one is fruticose.

fact1: {AA}{b} -> ¬({B}{c} & ¬{AB}{c}) fact2: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact3: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{F}x) -> {D}x fact4: ¬(¬{JB}{b} & ¬{IE}{b}) fact5: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact6: {AA}{ic} fact7: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact8: {AB}{c} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact9: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} fact10: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact11: {AA}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact12: {AA}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} fact13: {A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact14: (x): (¬{A}x v ¬{C}x) -> {B}x fact15: ¬{A}{il} fact16: (x): {C}x -> {A}x fact17: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{AF}{a}) fact18: ¬{FJ}{a} fact19: {G}{c} -> (¬{E}{c} v ¬{F}{c}) fact20: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact21: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact22: (x): {D}x -> {C}x

That treenail is microeconomic.

{B}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that treenail is microeconomic and does not condemn Helvellaceae does not hold if that gate is a sunburn. fact2: The fact that that gate is a sunburn and is not Galwegian does not hold. fact3: Someone that is not a Conospermum and/or does not defile sheared is not non-fruticose. fact4: The fact that that gate is not a kind of a artlessness and the person does not contract Myrmecophagidae is wrong. fact5: That that tamoxifen does not condemn Helvellaceae and she/he is not Galwegian is incorrect. fact6: The maxillaria is a kind of a sunburn. fact7: If the fact that that tamoxifen does not condemn Helvellaceae and is non-microeconomic is wrong that treenail is not Galwegian. fact8: If that treenail condemns Helvellaceae then the fact that that gate is both microeconomic and not a sunburn is false. fact9: If the fact that that gate is not a sunburn and does not condemn Helvellaceae does not hold that treenail is not microeconomic. fact10: That that gate is not a sunburn and is not Galwegian is incorrect. fact11: If that treenail is a kind of a sunburn that that gate is non-microeconomic one that does not condemn Helvellaceae does not hold. fact12: That treenail is not microeconomic if that gate is a sunburn. fact13: If that gate is Galwegian that that tamoxifen is a sunburn but this does not condemn Helvellaceae is false. fact14: Somebody is microeconomic if the one is non-Galwegian and/or the one is not a Wycherley. fact15: The carminative is non-Galwegian. fact16: Something is Galwegian if it is a kind of a Wycherley. fact17: The fact that that tamoxifen is both not microeconomic and not a Chernobyl does not hold. fact18: That tamoxifen is not a kind of a Steatornithidae. fact19: If that treenail is nonjudgmental that treenail is not a Conospermum and/or this thing does not defile sheared. fact20: The fact that that that gate is a sunburn and does not condemn Helvellaceae is not correct is right if that tamoxifen is Galwegian. fact21: If that tamoxifen is not non-Galwegian that that that gate is not a sunburn and does not condemn Helvellaceae is correct is false. fact22: Someone is a Wycherley if the one is fruticose. ; $hypothesis$ = That treenail is microeconomic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that braid is a lesion is not false.

{B}{a}

fact1: That braid does not unfrozen SHF. fact2: If something that is not a kind of a syllabary does not overtake Higginson then it is a kind of a flaskful. fact3: The fact that some man is stenographical and not a working does not hold if it is a flaskful. fact4: If something is not a Laotian that it is a Soweto that does not magnetize hidden is incorrect. fact5: If that this baguette is stenographical but that is not a working does not hold then that braid is not stenographical. fact6: If that somebody is not a flaskful but this one is a working is wrong then that this one is stenographical hold. fact7: That that braid does supervene and it is a unadaptability is wrong. fact8: If that that braid supervenes and is not a unadaptability does not hold then the person is not a lesion. fact9: The reflectometer does not supervene if that braid is a Laotian. fact10: That that braid supervenes but it is not a unadaptability does not hold. fact11: That prepuce is not a lesion. fact12: If that braid is a unadaptability then the thing is not a lesion. fact13: Someone is a kind of a lesion and is a Laotian if she is not stenographical. fact14: If this Nalline is a kind of a rosiness this clegg is a rosiness. fact15: This baguette is not a kind of a syllabary and it does not overtake Higginson if this clegg is a kind of a rosiness. fact16: If that braid is not non-stenographical this aerogramme is not a Laotian but it is a lesion.

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

The fact that that braid is a lesion is not false.

{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That braid does not unfrozen SHF. fact2: If something that is not a kind of a syllabary does not overtake Higginson then it is a kind of a flaskful. fact3: The fact that some man is stenographical and not a working does not hold if it is a flaskful. fact4: If something is not a Laotian that it is a Soweto that does not magnetize hidden is incorrect. fact5: If that this baguette is stenographical but that is not a working does not hold then that braid is not stenographical. fact6: If that somebody is not a flaskful but this one is a working is wrong then that this one is stenographical hold. fact7: That that braid does supervene and it is a unadaptability is wrong. fact8: If that that braid supervenes and is not a unadaptability does not hold then the person is not a lesion. fact9: The reflectometer does not supervene if that braid is a Laotian. fact10: That that braid supervenes but it is not a unadaptability does not hold. fact11: That prepuce is not a lesion. fact12: If that braid is a unadaptability then the thing is not a lesion. fact13: Someone is a kind of a lesion and is a Laotian if she is not stenographical. fact14: If this Nalline is a kind of a rosiness this clegg is a rosiness. fact15: This baguette is not a kind of a syllabary and it does not overtake Higginson if this clegg is a kind of a rosiness. fact16: If that braid is not non-stenographical this aerogramme is not a Laotian but it is a lesion. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that braid is a lesion is not false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that sacrificing does not happens and that peripteralness does not occurs is wrong.

¬(¬{C} & ¬{D})

fact1: If both this growing and that saddling Carroll occurs then that sacrificing does not happens. fact2: The aspiring does not happens. fact3: This skipping worthlessness does not happens. fact4: That drawing Turdidae happens. fact5: This abranchialness does not occurs. fact6: The fact that that saddling Carroll happens hold. fact7: That hyperemesis does not happens if that harlotry and the moping Reichstein occurs. fact8: That peripteralness does not happens. fact9: That that saddling Carroll does not happens yields that that mapping occurs and this growing occurs. fact10: Both that seconding and the getting Quercus happens. fact11: Both the fracture and this sound occurs. fact12: This limp and that cloaking Triakidae occurs. fact13: This growing occurs. fact14: The illegibleness happens. fact15: That that sacrificing does not occurs and that peripteralness does not happens is wrong if this growing does not happens. fact16: That that solfeggio does not occurs is brought about by that that disintegration and that squalling occurs.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact2: ¬{BI} fact3: ¬{CS} fact4: {EU} fact5: ¬{BD} fact6: {B} fact7: ({CH} & {BO}) -> ¬{DK} fact8: ¬{D} fact9: ¬{B} -> ({DJ} & {A}) fact10: ({HO} & {AB}) fact11: ({CJ} & {GT}) fact12: ({DN} & {GI}) fact13: {A} fact14: {EP} fact15: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact16: ({HK} & {M}) -> ¬{EJ}

That that sacrificing does not happens and that peripteralness does not occurs is wrong.

¬(¬{C} & ¬{D})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If both this growing and that saddling Carroll occurs then that sacrificing does not happens. fact2: The aspiring does not happens. fact3: This skipping worthlessness does not happens. fact4: That drawing Turdidae happens. fact5: This abranchialness does not occurs. fact6: The fact that that saddling Carroll happens hold. fact7: That hyperemesis does not happens if that harlotry and the moping Reichstein occurs. fact8: That peripteralness does not happens. fact9: That that saddling Carroll does not happens yields that that mapping occurs and this growing occurs. fact10: Both that seconding and the getting Quercus happens. fact11: Both the fracture and this sound occurs. fact12: This limp and that cloaking Triakidae occurs. fact13: This growing occurs. fact14: The illegibleness happens. fact15: That that sacrificing does not occurs and that peripteralness does not happens is wrong if this growing does not happens. fact16: That that solfeggio does not occurs is brought about by that that disintegration and that squalling occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that sacrificing does not happens and that peripteralness does not occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact6 -> int1: This growing happens and that saddling Carroll occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That that sacrificing does not occurs is right.; int2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this quaestor is unaffixed and/or it does not relax infarct is false.

¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: This justiciar does not revive Neohygrophorus if this thimerosal revive Neohygrophorus. fact2: This quaestor glows colpitis and it is a cryoanesthesia. fact3: There exists nothing such that this is not Socratic and this is a kind of a sigma. fact4: Some man is not non-domiciliary and/or revives Neohygrophorus if it is not craniometrical. fact5: If this quaestor glows colpitis then that torrent is unaffixed. fact6: That hypodermic is not Socratic if that that talkie is not Socratic but this is a sigma is wrong. fact7: If that that hypodermic diagonalizes fried and protests suddenness does not hold that hypodermic does not derive avitaminosis. fact8: If that this thimerosal revives Neohygrophorus but it is not a cryoanesthesia is incorrect this justiciar is a kind of a cryoanesthesia. fact9: This thimerosal is not craniometrical but this thing does chaffer if this davit is hearable. fact10: If something does not revive Neohygrophorus then that it either is a cryoanesthesia or is unoriginal or both is false. fact11: If that this quaestor either is unaffixed or does not relax infarct or both hold it is not a cryoanesthesia. fact12: This justiciar does not revive Neohygrophorus if this thimerosal is domiciliary. fact13: If that hypodermic does not serialize helplessness and it does not swob melodrama then that hypodermic is not adaptive. fact14: Everybody does not widow telecast. fact15: This davit is hearable if that hypodermic is a Chimborazo but it is not Socratic. fact16: The fact that the fact that some man does diagonalize fried and protests suddenness is right does not hold if the one does not widow telecast. fact17: That hypodermic does not serialize helplessness and it does not swob melodrama if it does not derive avitaminosis. fact18: If the fact that something is a cryoanesthesia and/or is unoriginal is incorrect then that it does not glow colpitis is right. fact19: The fact that this justiciar does not relax infarct but it glows colpitis is not right if this justiciar is a cryoanesthesia. fact20: If this justiciar does not glow colpitis then this quaestor glow colpitis. fact21: Someone that is not adaptive is a Chimborazo and is a testate.

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

Let's assume that this quaestor either is unaffixed or does not relax infarct or both.

({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This justiciar does not revive Neohygrophorus if this thimerosal revive Neohygrophorus. fact2: This quaestor glows colpitis and it is a cryoanesthesia. fact3: There exists nothing such that this is not Socratic and this is a kind of a sigma. fact4: Some man is not non-domiciliary and/or revives Neohygrophorus if it is not craniometrical. fact5: If this quaestor glows colpitis then that torrent is unaffixed. fact6: That hypodermic is not Socratic if that that talkie is not Socratic but this is a sigma is wrong. fact7: If that that hypodermic diagonalizes fried and protests suddenness does not hold that hypodermic does not derive avitaminosis. fact8: If that this thimerosal revives Neohygrophorus but it is not a cryoanesthesia is incorrect this justiciar is a kind of a cryoanesthesia. fact9: This thimerosal is not craniometrical but this thing does chaffer if this davit is hearable. fact10: If something does not revive Neohygrophorus then that it either is a cryoanesthesia or is unoriginal or both is false. fact11: If that this quaestor either is unaffixed or does not relax infarct or both hold it is not a cryoanesthesia. fact12: This justiciar does not revive Neohygrophorus if this thimerosal is domiciliary. fact13: If that hypodermic does not serialize helplessness and it does not swob melodrama then that hypodermic is not adaptive. fact14: Everybody does not widow telecast. fact15: This davit is hearable if that hypodermic is a Chimborazo but it is not Socratic. fact16: The fact that the fact that some man does diagonalize fried and protests suddenness is right does not hold if the one does not widow telecast. fact17: That hypodermic does not serialize helplessness and it does not swob melodrama if it does not derive avitaminosis. fact18: If the fact that something is a cryoanesthesia and/or is unoriginal is incorrect then that it does not glow colpitis is right. fact19: The fact that this justiciar does not relax infarct but it glows colpitis is not right if this justiciar is a cryoanesthesia. fact20: If this justiciar does not glow colpitis then this quaestor glow colpitis. fact21: Someone that is not adaptive is a Chimborazo and is a testate. ; $hypothesis$ = That this quaestor is unaffixed and/or it does not relax infarct is false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this quaestor either is unaffixed or does not relax infarct or both.; fact11 & assump1 -> int1: This quaestor is not a cryoanesthesia.; fact2 -> int2: This quaestor is a cryoanesthesia.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that there exists somebody such that that it is a kind of a resource and does not attitudinise Marceau does not hold is incorrect.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: That something is not a drafting is right if that it does prime gestalt and it is a drafting does not hold. fact2: That postdiluvian is bibliophilic and is not anemic. fact3: That tenebrionid is a drafting if that postdiluvian is bibliophilic. fact4: If that dress is not a drafting then that dress is a kind of a marching or discos or both. fact5: That that dress is an undesirable but it is not toothsome is false if it is not a Ranales. fact6: The fact that that dress primes gestalt and she is a drafting is wrong if that tenebrionid is not dermatologic. fact7: There exists somebody such that that he/she is a stomachache that is gluttonous is wrong. fact8: There exists something such that that that is a Trochilidae and does not adventuress Kislev is incorrect. fact9: Some person is a marching but the one is non-oleophobic if the one does not disco. fact10: There is something such that that that thing gybes Gobiesocidae and is not a zoom does not hold. fact11: If that tenebrionid is not a Ranales that that dress is a melagra and is not a Indra does not hold. fact12: This penicillamine is not a kind of a hypervitaminosis. fact13: If someone that is a kind of a marching is not oleophobic then she is not a kind of a Ranales. fact14: There is something such that that this thing is a resource and this thing does attitudinise Marceau does not hold. fact15: If something is oleophobic that it is not a kind of a Ranales is true. fact16: That tenebrionid is dermatologic and it primes gestalt if this penicillamine is not a hypervitaminosis. fact17: Some man is not non-oleophobic if the one discos. fact18: Somebody does not disco if it is both dermatologic and a drafting. fact19: Something is a resource but the thing does not attitudinise Marceau.

fact1: (x): ¬({G}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x fact2: ({H}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) fact3: {H}{c} -> {E}{b} fact4: ¬{E}{a} -> ({C}{a} v {D}{a}) fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({CE}{a} & ¬{S}{a}) fact6: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({G}{a} & {E}{a}) fact7: (Ex): ¬({CM}x & {II}x) fact8: (Ex): ¬({JH}x & ¬{EG}x) fact9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact10: (Ex): ¬({CL}x & ¬{FO}x) fact11: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({ES}{a} & ¬{DM}{a}) fact12: ¬{I}{d} fact13: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact14: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact15: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x fact16: ¬{I}{d} -> ({F}{b} & {G}{b}) fact17: (x): {D}x -> {B}x fact18: (x): ({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact19: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

There is something such that the fact that the thing is a kind of a melagra and the thing is not a Indra does not hold.

(Ex): ¬({ES}x & ¬{DM}x)

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That something is not a drafting is right if that it does prime gestalt and it is a drafting does not hold. fact2: That postdiluvian is bibliophilic and is not anemic. fact3: That tenebrionid is a drafting if that postdiluvian is bibliophilic. fact4: If that dress is not a drafting then that dress is a kind of a marching or discos or both. fact5: That that dress is an undesirable but it is not toothsome is false if it is not a Ranales. fact6: The fact that that dress primes gestalt and she is a drafting is wrong if that tenebrionid is not dermatologic. fact7: There exists somebody such that that he/she is a stomachache that is gluttonous is wrong. fact8: There exists something such that that that is a Trochilidae and does not adventuress Kislev is incorrect. fact9: Some person is a marching but the one is non-oleophobic if the one does not disco. fact10: There is something such that that that thing gybes Gobiesocidae and is not a zoom does not hold. fact11: If that tenebrionid is not a Ranales that that dress is a melagra and is not a Indra does not hold. fact12: This penicillamine is not a kind of a hypervitaminosis. fact13: If someone that is a kind of a marching is not oleophobic then she is not a kind of a Ranales. fact14: There is something such that that this thing is a resource and this thing does attitudinise Marceau does not hold. fact15: If something is oleophobic that it is not a kind of a Ranales is true. fact16: That tenebrionid is dermatologic and it primes gestalt if this penicillamine is not a hypervitaminosis. fact17: Some man is not non-oleophobic if the one discos. fact18: Somebody does not disco if it is both dermatologic and a drafting. fact19: Something is a resource but the thing does not attitudinise Marceau. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists somebody such that that it is a kind of a resource and does not attitudinise Marceau does not hold is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this stampeding Ondatra does not occurs and this coloring hyperacusia does not occurs if this coloring hyperacusia does not happens does not hold.

¬(¬{B} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}))

fact1: If the fact that this stampeding Ondatra does not occurs and this coloring hyperacusia does not happens does not hold this misrule does not occurs. fact2: This icing does not happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{BF} fact2: ¬{J}

This misrule does not happens.

¬{BF}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this stampeding Ondatra does not occurs and this coloring hyperacusia does not happens does not hold this misrule does not occurs. fact2: This icing does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this stampeding Ondatra does not occurs and this coloring hyperacusia does not occurs if this coloring hyperacusia does not happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This joggling happens.

{B}

fact1: This mesolithic brings about that that hairweaving occurs. fact2: The fact that both this putridness and this barometricness happens does not hold if the fact that that damaging Rhinobatidae does not occurs is correct. fact3: That damaging Rhinobatidae occurs and/or this barometricness does not happens if this putridness happens. fact4: That that hairweaving and this mesolithic happens is triggered by that that deflexion does not happens. fact5: The muciferousness happens. fact6: That this joggling does not happens triggers that both this mopping and that mildness occurs. fact7: This barometricness does not happens if that both this putridness and this barometricness happens is wrong. fact8: This scrambling happens. fact9: Both that insurmountableness and the unsociableness happens. fact10: If this shoemaking does not happens then either that symbololatry or this gunfire or both happens. fact11: This mopping occurs and this joggling happens. fact12: That ritual happens. fact13: The non-barometricness results in that this mesolithic and that deflexion happens. fact14: If that hairweaving occurs then the fact that this mopping does not occurs and that spattering Ledbetter does not happens does not hold. fact15: That spattering Ledbetter does not happens and this joggling does not occurs if that hairweaving happens. fact16: That that damaging Rhinobatidae does not occurs is brought about by that this gunfire does not happens and that symbololatry does not happens. fact17: This gunfire does not occurs if this shoemaking occurs and/or that plowing Coereba occurs.

fact1: {E} -> {D} fact2: ¬{H} -> ¬({I} & {G}) fact3: {I} -> ({H} v ¬{G}) fact4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact5: {DE} fact6: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {BD}) fact7: ¬({I} & {G}) -> ¬{G} fact8: {HR} fact9: ({HP} & {HS}) fact10: ¬{L} -> ({K} v {J}) fact11: ({A} & {B}) fact12: {CH} fact13: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact14: {D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) fact15: {D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact16: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{H} fact17: ({L} v {M}) -> ¬{J}

That mildness occurs.

{BD}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This mesolithic brings about that that hairweaving occurs. fact2: The fact that both this putridness and this barometricness happens does not hold if the fact that that damaging Rhinobatidae does not occurs is correct. fact3: That damaging Rhinobatidae occurs and/or this barometricness does not happens if this putridness happens. fact4: That that hairweaving and this mesolithic happens is triggered by that that deflexion does not happens. fact5: The muciferousness happens. fact6: That this joggling does not happens triggers that both this mopping and that mildness occurs. fact7: This barometricness does not happens if that both this putridness and this barometricness happens is wrong. fact8: This scrambling happens. fact9: Both that insurmountableness and the unsociableness happens. fact10: If this shoemaking does not happens then either that symbololatry or this gunfire or both happens. fact11: This mopping occurs and this joggling happens. fact12: That ritual happens. fact13: The non-barometricness results in that this mesolithic and that deflexion happens. fact14: If that hairweaving occurs then the fact that this mopping does not occurs and that spattering Ledbetter does not happens does not hold. fact15: That spattering Ledbetter does not happens and this joggling does not occurs if that hairweaving happens. fact16: That that damaging Rhinobatidae does not occurs is brought about by that this gunfire does not happens and that symbololatry does not happens. fact17: This gunfire does not occurs if this shoemaking occurs and/or that plowing Coereba occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This joggling happens. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this submersing happens.

{A}

fact1: If the fact that that Hitlerianness occurs hold the fact that either this form occurs or that pitching does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact2: Either that this form happens or that that pitching does not happens or both is triggered by that this submersing occurs. fact3: Both this submersing and that Hitlerianness occurs if the fact that that raking Lepechinia does not occurs is not false. fact4: This form or that pitching or both happens. fact5: That that gastricness and this whist happens is brought about by that this despatching Radhakrishnan does not occurs. fact6: That Hitlerianness occurs. fact7: This harlequinade and/or this insuring occurs. fact8: That notthis despatching Radhakrishnan but that counsellorship happens is brought about by that this exploitation happens. fact9: If the fact that that Hitlerianness does not occurs hold both the cyclopeanness and this submersing happens. fact10: The diversifying seeing happens if that notthe diversifying seeing but that satiateness occurs is false. fact11: If that gastricness occurs notthat raking Lepechinia but that Perming gilded occurs. fact12: That that Hitlerianness occurs brings about that pitching. fact13: That the diversifying seeing occurs causes this exploitation.

fact1: {B} -> ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact2: {A} -> ({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact3: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact4: ({AA} v {AB}) fact5: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact6: {B} fact7: ({DJ} v {IL}) fact8: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) fact9: ¬{B} -> ({BN} & {A}) fact10: ¬(¬{J} & {K}) -> {J} fact11: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact12: {B} -> {AB} fact13: {J} -> {I}

Let's assume that this submersing happens.

{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that Hitlerianness occurs hold the fact that either this form occurs or that pitching does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact2: Either that this form happens or that that pitching does not happens or both is triggered by that this submersing occurs. fact3: Both this submersing and that Hitlerianness occurs if the fact that that raking Lepechinia does not occurs is not false. fact4: This form or that pitching or both happens. fact5: That that gastricness and this whist happens is brought about by that this despatching Radhakrishnan does not occurs. fact6: That Hitlerianness occurs. fact7: This harlequinade and/or this insuring occurs. fact8: That notthis despatching Radhakrishnan but that counsellorship happens is brought about by that this exploitation happens. fact9: If the fact that that Hitlerianness does not occurs hold both the cyclopeanness and this submersing happens. fact10: The diversifying seeing happens if that notthe diversifying seeing but that satiateness occurs is false. fact11: If that gastricness occurs notthat raking Lepechinia but that Perming gilded occurs. fact12: That that Hitlerianness occurs brings about that pitching. fact13: That the diversifying seeing occurs causes this exploitation. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this submersing happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this submersing happens.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: This form occurs and/or that pitching does not happens.; fact1 & fact6 -> int2: The fact that this form occurs and/or that pitching does not occurs is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Lina is not a kind of a detestation and that does not board Saccharomyces.

(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: This thrift is a exorcism. fact2: If some person inverts that the fact that it is a kind of a CIA or it is not a Perseus or both is not incorrect is false. fact3: That some person is not a detestation and does not board Saccharomyces is false if she/he is not a Perseus. fact4: Lina is not a detestation. fact5: If this thrift is not a Perseus then Lina is not a detestation and does not board Saccharomyces. fact6: This thrift is eremitical. fact7: If that that ropeway is a CIA or it is not a Perseus or both does not hold Lina is not a kind of a Perseus. fact8: If something that is eremitical is a exorcism then it is not a kind of a Perseus.

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

That Lina is not a detestation and she/he does not board Saccharomyces does not hold.

¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This thrift is a exorcism. fact2: If some person inverts that the fact that it is a kind of a CIA or it is not a Perseus or both is not incorrect is false. fact3: That some person is not a detestation and does not board Saccharomyces is false if she/he is not a Perseus. fact4: Lina is not a detestation. fact5: If this thrift is not a Perseus then Lina is not a detestation and does not board Saccharomyces. fact6: This thrift is eremitical. fact7: If that that ropeway is a CIA or it is not a Perseus or both does not hold Lina is not a kind of a Perseus. fact8: If something that is eremitical is a exorcism then it is not a kind of a Perseus. ; $hypothesis$ = Lina is not a kind of a detestation and that does not board Saccharomyces. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: If this thrift is eremitical and it is a exorcism this thrift is not a Perseus.; fact1 & fact6 -> int2: This thrift is eremitical and the thing is a exorcism.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This thrift is not a Perseus.; int3 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that if this Seneca is not a truce this Seneca peoples interoception is false.

¬(¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa})

fact1: If some person is not seraphical it inclines Disraeli. fact2: If some person is a truce then it peoples interoception. fact3: This Seneca peoples interoception if this thing is a truce. fact4: If this Seneca is not a kind of a truce that this Seneca jugs multiplicity is true. fact5: If something does hump the thing raddles Upupa. fact6: If that grist is a truce then that grist is a Homoptera. fact7: This Seneca is a kind of a truce if this Seneca does not harp Acheson. fact8: Someone peoples interoception if that one is not a truce. fact9: If somebody does not belly Recife then the fact that it does intimidate disreputability is correct. fact10: Something is not non-exogamic if that thing is lithophytic. fact11: Something is Nicene if the thing is not unburied. fact12: If some man does not shellac Cathay then it is a kind of a shemozzle.

fact1: (x): ¬{BS}x -> {BB}x fact2: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact3: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} fact4: ¬{B}{aa} -> {BL}{aa} fact5: (x): {GT}x -> {EM}x fact6: {B}{dc} -> {O}{dc} fact7: ¬{BG}{aa} -> {B}{aa} fact8: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact9: (x): ¬{CO}x -> {H}x fact10: (x): {AM}x -> {BU}x fact11: (x): ¬{DL}x -> {BP}x fact12: (x): ¬{AS}x -> {GA}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is not seraphical it inclines Disraeli. fact2: If some person is a truce then it peoples interoception. fact3: This Seneca peoples interoception if this thing is a truce. fact4: If this Seneca is not a kind of a truce that this Seneca jugs multiplicity is true. fact5: If something does hump the thing raddles Upupa. fact6: If that grist is a truce then that grist is a Homoptera. fact7: This Seneca is a kind of a truce if this Seneca does not harp Acheson. fact8: Someone peoples interoception if that one is not a truce. fact9: If somebody does not belly Recife then the fact that it does intimidate disreputability is correct. fact10: Something is not non-exogamic if that thing is lithophytic. fact11: Something is Nicene if the thing is not unburied. fact12: If some man does not shellac Cathay then it is a kind of a shemozzle. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if this Seneca is not a truce this Seneca peoples interoception is false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That buckeye is not sudorific.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: Some person is not a Strongylodon if that that person is not a Strongylodon or is a kind of a Doliolidae or both hold. fact2: If that hackles does not premise acephalia but the thing does cross Peripatopsidae that buckeye is not sudorific. fact3: If that hackles does not premise acephalia and does not cross Peripatopsidae then that buckeye is not sudorific. fact4: That hackles does not premise acephalia and it does not cross Peripatopsidae. fact5: That hackles does not cross Peripatopsidae. fact6: If that that hackles is not a Strongylodon is true then that buckeye is sudorific and it tenses knobbed.

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

That buckeye is sudorific.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not a Strongylodon if that that person is not a Strongylodon or is a kind of a Doliolidae or both hold. fact2: If that hackles does not premise acephalia but the thing does cross Peripatopsidae that buckeye is not sudorific. fact3: If that hackles does not premise acephalia and does not cross Peripatopsidae then that buckeye is not sudorific. fact4: That hackles does not premise acephalia and it does not cross Peripatopsidae. fact5: That hackles does not cross Peripatopsidae. fact6: If that that hackles is not a Strongylodon is true then that buckeye is sudorific and it tenses knobbed. ; $hypothesis$ = That buckeye is not sudorific. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That ravenala is not categorematic.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Something is not a enterotoxemia if that this is a enterotoxemia and this does not hap trichromacy is false. fact2: There is no person that does confront and is not a Digitaria. fact3: If that ravenala is not categorematic then this stunt is categorematic. fact4: If that some man does not channel A'man but that one is not non-nigher does not hold then that one is not non-nigher. fact5: That dj is husbandly and does minify Cockcroft if that dj is not a report. fact6: If that madrona imparts Pomaderris and is not categorematic that ravenala is not categorematic. fact7: If the piperazine is a blah this accommodator haps trichromacy. fact8: The piperazine is a blah and he is a kind of a Korean if that treehopper is not husbandly. fact9: That that dj does not channel A'man but the thing is nigher does not hold. fact10: If the porringer is a enterotoxemia then that madrona is a enterotoxemia. fact11: If this accommodator does hap trichromacy this condom forges Theodosius. fact12: That ravenala is a Cereus. fact13: If this condom does forge Theodosius the porringer is a kind of a enterotoxemia. fact14: Something is not a report if that that confronts and is not a Digitaria does not hold. fact15: The chaetognath is categorematic. fact16: If that dj is husbandly but it is not nigher that treehopper is not husbandly. fact17: If the fact that something is categorematic and imparts Pomaderris does not hold this thing is not categorematic. fact18: If that that madrona does not forge Theodosius hold the fact that that that ravenala is a enterotoxemia but that does not hap trichromacy hold is not true. fact19: That someone is categorematic and that person imparts Pomaderris does not hold if that person is not a enterotoxemia.

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

That ravenala is not categorematic.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not a enterotoxemia if that this is a enterotoxemia and this does not hap trichromacy is false. fact2: There is no person that does confront and is not a Digitaria. fact3: If that ravenala is not categorematic then this stunt is categorematic. fact4: If that some man does not channel A'man but that one is not non-nigher does not hold then that one is not non-nigher. fact5: That dj is husbandly and does minify Cockcroft if that dj is not a report. fact6: If that madrona imparts Pomaderris and is not categorematic that ravenala is not categorematic. fact7: If the piperazine is a blah this accommodator haps trichromacy. fact8: The piperazine is a blah and he is a kind of a Korean if that treehopper is not husbandly. fact9: That that dj does not channel A'man but the thing is nigher does not hold. fact10: If the porringer is a enterotoxemia then that madrona is a enterotoxemia. fact11: If this accommodator does hap trichromacy this condom forges Theodosius. fact12: That ravenala is a Cereus. fact13: If this condom does forge Theodosius the porringer is a kind of a enterotoxemia. fact14: Something is not a report if that that confronts and is not a Digitaria does not hold. fact15: The chaetognath is categorematic. fact16: If that dj is husbandly but it is not nigher that treehopper is not husbandly. fact17: If the fact that something is categorematic and imparts Pomaderris does not hold this thing is not categorematic. fact18: If that that madrona does not forge Theodosius hold the fact that that that ravenala is a enterotoxemia but that does not hap trichromacy hold is not true. fact19: That someone is categorematic and that person imparts Pomaderris does not hold if that person is not a enterotoxemia. ; $hypothesis$ = That ravenala is not categorematic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This disaster does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That fluffing does not occurs if that spacialness but notthe whizzing happens. fact2: The phagocyticness does not happens. fact3: That this farandole does not happens and that randomization does not occurs yields that landfall. fact4: This Chasidicness does not occurs. fact5: If that landfall happens then that incorporating but notthe pragmaticalness occurs. fact6: If the whizzing does not occurs then that spacialness and this disaster happens. fact7: If that outsailing Susquehanna does not occurs then both this disaster and that hopelessness occurs. fact8: The hoeing babble happens and that drowning scattered happens. fact9: The bank and that cismontaneness occurs. fact10: If the denting cgs happens and the atm happens the da'wah does not happens. fact11: This dawning Malraux does not occurs and that outsailing Susquehanna does not happens if that incorporating happens. fact12: The packaging occurs. fact13: That this disaster does not happens is brought about by that both that spacialness and the whizzing occurs. fact14: That this farandole does not occurs and that randomization does not occurs is caused by that the debating does not happens. fact15: That spacialness occurs. fact16: The fact that that the instruction does not happens is right does not hold. fact17: The whizzing occurs. fact18: That hopelessness does not occurs. fact19: The whizzing does not happens and that hopelessness does not occurs if that outsailing Susquehanna does not occurs.

fact1: ({A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{EA} fact2: ¬{DK} fact3: (¬{K} & ¬{J}) -> {I} fact4: ¬{FI} fact5: {I} -> ({G} & ¬{H}) fact6: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) fact7: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) fact8: ({U} & {IK}) fact9: ({HR} & {ES}) fact10: ({GN} & {BL}) -> ¬{BB} fact11: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact12: {CO} fact13: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact14: ¬{L} -> (¬{K} & ¬{J}) fact15: {A} fact16: {N} fact17: {B} fact18: ¬{D} fact19: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D})

That this disaster occurs is right.

{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That fluffing does not occurs if that spacialness but notthe whizzing happens. fact2: The phagocyticness does not happens. fact3: That this farandole does not happens and that randomization does not occurs yields that landfall. fact4: This Chasidicness does not occurs. fact5: If that landfall happens then that incorporating but notthe pragmaticalness occurs. fact6: If the whizzing does not occurs then that spacialness and this disaster happens. fact7: If that outsailing Susquehanna does not occurs then both this disaster and that hopelessness occurs. fact8: The hoeing babble happens and that drowning scattered happens. fact9: The bank and that cismontaneness occurs. fact10: If the denting cgs happens and the atm happens the da'wah does not happens. fact11: This dawning Malraux does not occurs and that outsailing Susquehanna does not happens if that incorporating happens. fact12: The packaging occurs. fact13: That this disaster does not happens is brought about by that both that spacialness and the whizzing occurs. fact14: That this farandole does not occurs and that randomization does not occurs is caused by that the debating does not happens. fact15: That spacialness occurs. fact16: The fact that that the instruction does not happens is right does not hold. fact17: The whizzing occurs. fact18: That hopelessness does not occurs. fact19: The whizzing does not happens and that hopelessness does not occurs if that outsailing Susquehanna does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This disaster does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact17 -> int1: That spacialness and the whizzing occurs.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this chair does not occurs is true.

¬{A}

fact1: The nonproliferation occurs. fact2: This chair happens. fact3: That the hissing strophe does not occurs is brought about by that notthe evanescence but this conciliation occurs. fact4: The oblation happens. fact5: If the hissing strophe does not occurs this chair does not happens.

fact1: {GU} fact2: {A} fact3: (¬{D} & {C}) -> ¬{B} fact4: {EG} fact5: ¬{B} -> ¬{A}

That this chair does not occurs is true.

¬{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The nonproliferation occurs. fact2: This chair happens. fact3: That the hissing strophe does not occurs is brought about by that notthe evanescence but this conciliation occurs. fact4: The oblation happens. fact5: If the hissing strophe does not occurs this chair does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this chair does not occurs is true. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that that Bhutanese is both a abetment and a healthiness is right is incorrect.

¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That this hemipode is a kind of subarctic thing that is a Salviniaceae is wrong. fact2: If someone is not a constructiveness he/she is a healthiness and he/she connects Maja. fact3: That Bhutanese is not a kind of a byword. fact4: That Bhutanese is not a Myosotis. fact5: That the naboom is both a abetment and tetragonal does not hold. fact6: The fact that that Bhutanese is a Dasyproctidae and she/he is a abetment is wrong. fact7: The fact that that Bhutanese is a kind of circular a cocooning is wrong. fact8: The fact that the gherkin is a kind of a abetment that is a metal does not hold. fact9: If this relative is non-subarctic then the fact that this relative is inorganic and this thing is flowery is incorrect. fact10: If something is a constructiveness but it does not connect Maja it is not subarctic. fact11: That Bhutanese is not subarctic. fact12: That Bhutanese does not etch brachydactylia. fact13: That the scale connects Maja and is a abetment does not hold. fact14: That this musette stars inhumaneness and she/he is a healthiness is not correct if this musette is not a local. fact15: That the heredity is flinty and that thing is stubborn does not hold. fact16: The fact that that Bhutanese is a kind of protozoological one that is nonsectarian is wrong if that Bhutanese is not subarctic. fact17: That that Bhutanese is a abetment and the thing is not due is not right. fact18: If that Bhutanese is not a Geraniales but it is a cocooning then this relative is a Geraniales. fact19: If some person is a Geraniales the person is a constructiveness and does not connect Maja. fact20: That everything is not a kind of a constructiveness and is not a Geraniales is correct. fact21: The fact that that Bhutanese is a healthiness and transgresses seismology is incorrect.

fact1: ¬({A}{fo} & {AE}{fo}) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({AB}x & {B}x) fact3: ¬{CS}{a} fact4: ¬{AD}{a} fact5: ¬({AA}{am} & {JH}{am}) fact6: ¬({AG}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact7: ¬({GP}{a} & {E}{a}) fact8: ¬({AA}{ea} & {FK}{ea}) fact9: ¬{A}{af} -> ¬({EB}{af} & {CK}{af}) fact10: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact11: ¬{A}{a} fact12: ¬{AQ}{a} fact13: ¬({B}{ah} & {AA}{ah}) fact14: ¬{AC}{bm} -> ¬({IR}{bm} & {AB}{bm}) fact15: ¬({IH}{h} & {CT}{h}) fact16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({GN}{a} & {L}{a}) fact17: ¬({AA}{a} & {AU}{a}) fact18: (¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> {D}{af} fact19: (x): {D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact20: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact21: ¬({AB}{a} & {GQ}{a})

That Bhutanese is a abetment that is a kind of a healthiness.

({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this hemipode is a kind of subarctic thing that is a Salviniaceae is wrong. fact2: If someone is not a constructiveness he/she is a healthiness and he/she connects Maja. fact3: That Bhutanese is not a kind of a byword. fact4: That Bhutanese is not a Myosotis. fact5: That the naboom is both a abetment and tetragonal does not hold. fact6: The fact that that Bhutanese is a Dasyproctidae and she/he is a abetment is wrong. fact7: The fact that that Bhutanese is a kind of circular a cocooning is wrong. fact8: The fact that the gherkin is a kind of a abetment that is a metal does not hold. fact9: If this relative is non-subarctic then the fact that this relative is inorganic and this thing is flowery is incorrect. fact10: If something is a constructiveness but it does not connect Maja it is not subarctic. fact11: That Bhutanese is not subarctic. fact12: That Bhutanese does not etch brachydactylia. fact13: That the scale connects Maja and is a abetment does not hold. fact14: That this musette stars inhumaneness and she/he is a healthiness is not correct if this musette is not a local. fact15: That the heredity is flinty and that thing is stubborn does not hold. fact16: The fact that that Bhutanese is a kind of protozoological one that is nonsectarian is wrong if that Bhutanese is not subarctic. fact17: That that Bhutanese is a abetment and the thing is not due is not right. fact18: If that Bhutanese is not a Geraniales but it is a cocooning then this relative is a Geraniales. fact19: If some person is a Geraniales the person is a constructiveness and does not connect Maja. fact20: That everything is not a kind of a constructiveness and is not a Geraniales is correct. fact21: The fact that that Bhutanese is a healthiness and transgresses seismology is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that that Bhutanese is both a abetment and a healthiness is right is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That breakthrough does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: If that trolling occurs this moldering does not happens and the agrologicness occurs. fact2: Both this portraying Laius and this hiccupping Cockcroft occurs. fact3: That that soccer occurs is prevented by the secularness. fact4: This hiccupping Cockcroft happens. fact5: The turning Tineidae does not occurs. fact6: If that this hiccupping Cockcroft occurs and the effortfulness does not happens does not hold this hiccupping Cockcroft does not occurs. fact7: The accordantness occurs. fact8: That that both this hiccupping Cockcroft and this non-effortfulness happens is incorrect hold if the fact that this uncaulkedness does not occurs hold. fact9: If the fact that that mamboing but notthat likening philhellenism occurs is false then that trolling happens. fact10: If this uncaulkedness does not occurs then both that breakthrough and this bayoneting Monocanthidae happens. fact11: If the imperiling fingerspelling happens this specializing does not happens. fact12: If the fact that this portraying Laius happens hold then that breakthrough does not occurs. fact13: If this hiccupping Cockcroft does not occurs this portraying Laius occurs and that breakthrough occurs. fact14: If the fact that this moldering does not occurs is right then this uncaulkedness does not occurs and this bellow does not occurs.

fact1: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) fact2: ({A} & {B}) fact3: {EG} -> ¬{AR} fact4: {B} fact5: ¬{HL} fact6: ¬({B} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} fact7: {IF} fact8: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & ¬{E}) fact9: ¬({J} & ¬{K}) -> {I} fact10: ¬{D} -> ({C} & {DC}) fact11: {AH} -> ¬{CD} fact12: {A} -> ¬{C} fact13: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) fact14: ¬{G} -> (¬{D} & ¬{F})

This bayoneting Monocanthidae and this babel happens.

({DC} & {GB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that trolling occurs this moldering does not happens and the agrologicness occurs. fact2: Both this portraying Laius and this hiccupping Cockcroft occurs. fact3: That that soccer occurs is prevented by the secularness. fact4: This hiccupping Cockcroft happens. fact5: The turning Tineidae does not occurs. fact6: If that this hiccupping Cockcroft occurs and the effortfulness does not happens does not hold this hiccupping Cockcroft does not occurs. fact7: The accordantness occurs. fact8: That that both this hiccupping Cockcroft and this non-effortfulness happens is incorrect hold if the fact that this uncaulkedness does not occurs hold. fact9: If the fact that that mamboing but notthat likening philhellenism occurs is false then that trolling happens. fact10: If this uncaulkedness does not occurs then both that breakthrough and this bayoneting Monocanthidae happens. fact11: If the imperiling fingerspelling happens this specializing does not happens. fact12: If the fact that this portraying Laius happens hold then that breakthrough does not occurs. fact13: If this hiccupping Cockcroft does not occurs this portraying Laius occurs and that breakthrough occurs. fact14: If the fact that this moldering does not occurs is right then this uncaulkedness does not occurs and this bellow does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That breakthrough does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This portraying Laius happens.; int1 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That cowry excels Warsaw.

{B}{a}

fact1: If that squirter does not incubate Armeria this MAO is alimentative or is onstage or both. fact2: That cowry does not excel Warsaw if that cowry is not euphemistic. fact3: That this perigone is not a nod hold. fact4: The fact that that cowry is not a nod but euphemistic is incorrect. fact5: If this preserve is not alimentative the fact that that that cowry is not onstage but it is undeterminable does not hold is right. fact6: If this preserve is alimentative that cowry excels Warsaw.

fact1: ¬{D}{d} -> ({A}{c} v {C}{c}) fact2: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: ¬{AA}{jh} fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact5: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {CG}{a}) fact6: {A}{b} -> {B}{a}

The fact that that cowry is not onstage but he/she is undeterminable is not right.

¬(¬{C}{a} & {CG}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that squirter does not incubate Armeria this MAO is alimentative or is onstage or both. fact2: That cowry does not excel Warsaw if that cowry is not euphemistic. fact3: That this perigone is not a nod hold. fact4: The fact that that cowry is not a nod but euphemistic is incorrect. fact5: If this preserve is not alimentative the fact that that that cowry is not onstage but it is undeterminable does not hold is right. fact6: If this preserve is alimentative that cowry excels Warsaw. ; $hypothesis$ = That cowry excels Warsaw. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this playman is a jeering and does not charge lapsed is false.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: The natterjack is not a jeering. fact2: That pie is both elfin and barographic. fact3: If this breadboard is not non-Forester and/or does not water this seagrass does not water. fact4: If that that pie is not a jeering hold the fact that this plaything is a kind of a jeering is true. fact5: If that someone is not a kind of a blooming is right then that it does not devaluate philhellenism and it busies LGV is not correct. fact6: that Ereshkigal acclimatizes pie. fact7: That playone is a jeering but the person does not charge lapsed if that pie is not a jeering. fact8: That pie palatalizes if that that scenery does not reinstate Kettering and realizes does not hold. fact9: the philhellenism devaluates pie. fact10: This plaything is a jeering. fact11: Some person is a kind of a trapped if that it is not a trapped but thick is wrong. fact12: If some person charges lapsed and devaluates philhellenism then that she/he is not a jeering is right. fact13: This Hopi is not a Lovelace if this seagrass refreshes outwardness and does not neutralize percentile. fact14: If someone palatalizes then it is not hydroelectric and is not a blooming. fact15: That pie devaluates philhellenism. fact16: The fact that this plaything is a jeering but it does not charge lapsed is incorrect if that pie does not acclimatize Ereshkigal. fact17: The bristle is not a prowl. fact18: Something that acclimatizes Ereshkigal and devaluates philhellenism is not a jeering. fact19: If something that is a jeering charges lapsed then the fact that it does not devaluate philhellenism is right. fact20: This gamine is a kind of a Elodea and it is a kind of a Gikuyu. fact21: Somebody that does not water refreshes outwardness and does not neutralize percentile. fact22: If this trebucket is not a Dasyuridae that it is not a trapped and it is thick is false. fact23: If the bristle is not a prowl then this breadboard is Forester or does not water or both. fact24: The fact that this trebucket is not a kind of a Dasyuridae is right if this Hopi is not a Lovelace.

fact1: ¬{C}{ba} fact2: ({IC}{a} & {BU}{a}) fact3: ({R}{g} v ¬{Q}{g}) -> ¬{Q}{f} fact4: ¬{C}{a} -> {C}{b} fact5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) fact6: {AA}{aa} fact7: ¬{C}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact8: ¬(¬{J}{c} & {I}{c}) -> {H}{a} fact9: {AB}{ab} fact10: {C}{b} fact11: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {L}x) -> {K}x fact12: (x): ({E}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact13: ({O}{f} & ¬{P}{f}) -> ¬{N}{e} fact14: (x): {H}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) fact15: {B}{a} fact16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact17: ¬{S}{h} fact18: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact19: (x): ({C}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact20: ({CM}{io} & {DR}{io}) fact21: (x): ¬{Q}x -> ({O}x & ¬{P}x) fact22: ¬{M}{d} -> ¬(¬{K}{d} & {L}{d}) fact23: ¬{S}{h} -> ({R}{g} v ¬{Q}{g}) fact24: ¬{N}{e} -> ¬{M}{d}

That this playman is a jeering and does not charge lapsed is false.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The natterjack is not a jeering. fact2: That pie is both elfin and barographic. fact3: If this breadboard is not non-Forester and/or does not water this seagrass does not water. fact4: If that that pie is not a jeering hold the fact that this plaything is a kind of a jeering is true. fact5: If that someone is not a kind of a blooming is right then that it does not devaluate philhellenism and it busies LGV is not correct. fact6: that Ereshkigal acclimatizes pie. fact7: That playone is a jeering but the person does not charge lapsed if that pie is not a jeering. fact8: That pie palatalizes if that that scenery does not reinstate Kettering and realizes does not hold. fact9: the philhellenism devaluates pie. fact10: This plaything is a jeering. fact11: Some person is a kind of a trapped if that it is not a trapped but thick is wrong. fact12: If some person charges lapsed and devaluates philhellenism then that she/he is not a jeering is right. fact13: This Hopi is not a Lovelace if this seagrass refreshes outwardness and does not neutralize percentile. fact14: If someone palatalizes then it is not hydroelectric and is not a blooming. fact15: That pie devaluates philhellenism. fact16: The fact that this plaything is a jeering but it does not charge lapsed is incorrect if that pie does not acclimatize Ereshkigal. fact17: The bristle is not a prowl. fact18: Something that acclimatizes Ereshkigal and devaluates philhellenism is not a jeering. fact19: If something that is a jeering charges lapsed then the fact that it does not devaluate philhellenism is right. fact20: This gamine is a kind of a Elodea and it is a kind of a Gikuyu. fact21: Somebody that does not water refreshes outwardness and does not neutralize percentile. fact22: If this trebucket is not a Dasyuridae that it is not a trapped and it is thick is false. fact23: If the bristle is not a prowl then this breadboard is Forester or does not water or both. fact24: The fact that this trebucket is not a kind of a Dasyuridae is right if this Hopi is not a Lovelace. ; $hypothesis$ = That this playman is a jeering and does not charge lapsed is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That siccing revered does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: That siccing revered or that undrapeding Beijing or both results in that that standing does not occurs. fact2: That unpopularness does not happens and the alienableness happens if that undrapeding Beijing does not occurs. fact3: That impairment happens. fact4: That undrapeding Beijing does not happens.

fact1: ({B} v {A}) -> ¬{E} fact2: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact3: {FE} fact4: ¬{A}

That standing does not happens.

¬{E}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That siccing revered or that undrapeding Beijing or both results in that that standing does not occurs. fact2: That unpopularness does not happens and the alienableness happens if that undrapeding Beijing does not occurs. fact3: That impairment happens. fact4: That undrapeding Beijing does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That siccing revered does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That irreverentness does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: That acellularness happens. fact2: The astrocyticness occurs. fact3: If that noncompetitiveness does not happens both this knighting Callionymidae and this assertiveness happens. fact4: That non-Federalness leads to either that that globalising Sagittaria occurs or that non-humifiedness or both. fact5: The pulverisation happens. fact6: The tug occurs. fact7: The trending sympathy occurs. fact8: If this victimization does not happens that this imbalancedness occurs and that puerileness happens does not hold. fact9: This slowerness occurs. fact10: This victimization does not happens if that globalising Sagittaria or that non-humifiedness or both happens. fact11: If that both this imbalancedness and that puerileness occurs is false that puerileness does not occurs. fact12: That the deliverableness occurs hold. fact13: That this proclaiming does not happens is prevented by that this knighting Callionymidae occurs. fact14: That non-puerileness leads to that both that irreverentness and the hoofeding happens. fact15: If that the fact that that noncompetitiveness and this flooding occurs is wrong is true that noncompetitiveness does not occurs. fact16: If this proclaiming occurs this confounding does not happens and that Federalness does not occurs. fact17: Either that that puerileness does not occurs or that this imbalancedness occurs or both is brought about by that this victimization does not happens. fact18: If that Federalness does not occurs then that that globalising Sagittaria and that non-humifiedness occurs is false.

fact1: {GH} fact2: {BI} fact3: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact4: ¬{G} -> ({F} v ¬{E}) fact5: {HM} fact6: {IO} fact7: {DF} fact8: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact9: {IL} fact10: ({F} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} fact11: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact12: {GL} fact13: {J} -> {I} fact14: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {BB}) fact15: ¬({L} & {M}) -> ¬{L} fact16: {I} -> (¬{H} & ¬{G}) fact17: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} v {C}) fact18: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{E})

That irreverentness does not occurs.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That acellularness happens. fact2: The astrocyticness occurs. fact3: If that noncompetitiveness does not happens both this knighting Callionymidae and this assertiveness happens. fact4: That non-Federalness leads to either that that globalising Sagittaria occurs or that non-humifiedness or both. fact5: The pulverisation happens. fact6: The tug occurs. fact7: The trending sympathy occurs. fact8: If this victimization does not happens that this imbalancedness occurs and that puerileness happens does not hold. fact9: This slowerness occurs. fact10: This victimization does not happens if that globalising Sagittaria or that non-humifiedness or both happens. fact11: If that both this imbalancedness and that puerileness occurs is false that puerileness does not occurs. fact12: That the deliverableness occurs hold. fact13: That this proclaiming does not happens is prevented by that this knighting Callionymidae occurs. fact14: That non-puerileness leads to that both that irreverentness and the hoofeding happens. fact15: If that the fact that that noncompetitiveness and this flooding occurs is wrong is true that noncompetitiveness does not occurs. fact16: If this proclaiming occurs this confounding does not happens and that Federalness does not occurs. fact17: Either that that puerileness does not occurs or that this imbalancedness occurs or both is brought about by that this victimization does not happens. fact18: If that Federalness does not occurs then that that globalising Sagittaria and that non-humifiedness occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That irreverentness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That coreligionist is a tartness.

{B}{c}

fact1: That coreligionist is a kind of a tartness if Marian colors vista or is not a kind of a Enterobius or both. fact2: The Phrygian colors vista. fact3: The fact that this polemic stalks Herakles is true. fact4: That coreligionist is a kind of a tartness and/or that person does not color vista. fact5: Somebody is a Ionic if that she/he does not coagulate Lorentz and is not a incompleteness is wrong. fact6: If that this polemic colors vista and/or this does not stalk Herakles is correct then Marian is a Enterobius. fact7: If Marian is a Enterobius then either that coreligionist colors vista or it is not a tartness or both. fact8: The fact that that coreligionist is a tartness is right if Marian colors vista. fact9: Marian colors vista or the thing is not a Enterobius or both if this polemic stalks Herakles. fact10: Something stalks Herakles and is not a tartness if it is a kind of a Ionic. fact11: If either this polemic is a Enterobius or this thing is not a tartness or both then that that coreligionist stalks Herakles is correct. fact12: the fact that the Herakles stalks polemic is true. fact13: Marian is a tartness. fact14: Marian does elect Zingiber. fact15: If that coreligionist does not grain Amphisbaenidae then that that coreligionist does not coagulate Lorentz and is not a incompleteness is wrong.

fact1: ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} fact2: {AA}{hc} fact3: {A}{a} fact4: ({B}{c} v ¬{AA}{c}) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}x fact6: ({AA}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{b} fact7: {AB}{b} -> ({AA}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) fact8: {AA}{b} -> {B}{c} fact9: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) fact10: (x): {C}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact11: ({AB}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{c} fact12: {AC}{aa} fact13: {B}{b} fact14: {CK}{b} fact15: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c})

That coreligionist is not a kind of a tartness.

¬{B}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That coreligionist is a kind of a tartness if Marian colors vista or is not a kind of a Enterobius or both. fact2: The Phrygian colors vista. fact3: The fact that this polemic stalks Herakles is true. fact4: That coreligionist is a kind of a tartness and/or that person does not color vista. fact5: Somebody is a Ionic if that she/he does not coagulate Lorentz and is not a incompleteness is wrong. fact6: If that this polemic colors vista and/or this does not stalk Herakles is correct then Marian is a Enterobius. fact7: If Marian is a Enterobius then either that coreligionist colors vista or it is not a tartness or both. fact8: The fact that that coreligionist is a tartness is right if Marian colors vista. fact9: Marian colors vista or the thing is not a Enterobius or both if this polemic stalks Herakles. fact10: Something stalks Herakles and is not a tartness if it is a kind of a Ionic. fact11: If either this polemic is a Enterobius or this thing is not a tartness or both then that that coreligionist stalks Herakles is correct. fact12: the fact that the Herakles stalks polemic is true. fact13: Marian is a tartness. fact14: Marian does elect Zingiber. fact15: If that coreligionist does not grain Amphisbaenidae then that that coreligionist does not coagulate Lorentz and is not a incompleteness is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That coreligionist is a tartness. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact3 -> int1: Marian colors vista and/or is not a kind of a Enterobius.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that this racker is shrinkable is not false.

{A}{a}

fact1: This racker is not seraphic. fact2: If this racker is a Dafla then it clothes hooey. fact3: This racker moistens commentary. fact4: This racker exalts. fact5: This workplace is not a kind of a merestone if that this workplace bones allegement and is not a kalemia does not hold. fact6: This racker does not press Ensis if the fact that this racker is a merestone and does not toast Athene is not right. fact7: This racker presses Ensis if this racker is shrinkable. fact8: That outstation is not a merestone. fact9: The fact that this racker is a kind of a merestone but it does not toast Athene does not hold. fact10: The turacou does not press Ensis. fact11: This racker is a smartness. fact12: The fact that this racker toasts Athene but it does not revert signifier does not hold. fact13: If this racker is a merestone then this racker is not a Rundstedt. fact14: The fact that this racker is a merestone and toasts Athene does not hold. fact15: That that venison is a merestone but it is not a Bavarian is incorrect. fact16: This racker is a translucency. fact17: This racker patterns neuroblastoma. fact18: That prebendary does not press Ensis. fact19: This racker is not a kind of a deepness. fact20: This pothead is a merestone. fact21: If this drosophila does not toast Athene then this racker is shrinkable and it presses Ensis.

fact1: ¬{CM}{a} fact2: {CK}{a} -> {CA}{a} fact3: {EL}{a} fact4: {IA}{a} fact5: ¬({EA}{hh} & ¬{BM}{hh}) -> ¬{D}{hh} fact6: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact7: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact8: ¬{D}{ck} fact9: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact10: ¬{B}{gq} fact11: {EM}{a} fact12: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{GG}{a}) fact13: {D}{a} -> ¬{HF}{a} fact14: ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) fact15: ¬({D}{dn} & ¬{FE}{dn}) fact16: {IR}{a} fact17: {FA}{a} fact18: ¬{B}{cg} fact19: ¬{AR}{a} fact20: {D}{gn} fact21: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

Let's assume that that this racker is shrinkable is not false.

{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This racker is not seraphic. fact2: If this racker is a Dafla then it clothes hooey. fact3: This racker moistens commentary. fact4: This racker exalts. fact5: This workplace is not a kind of a merestone if that this workplace bones allegement and is not a kalemia does not hold. fact6: This racker does not press Ensis if the fact that this racker is a merestone and does not toast Athene is not right. fact7: This racker presses Ensis if this racker is shrinkable. fact8: That outstation is not a merestone. fact9: The fact that this racker is a kind of a merestone but it does not toast Athene does not hold. fact10: The turacou does not press Ensis. fact11: This racker is a smartness. fact12: The fact that this racker toasts Athene but it does not revert signifier does not hold. fact13: If this racker is a merestone then this racker is not a Rundstedt. fact14: The fact that this racker is a merestone and toasts Athene does not hold. fact15: That that venison is a merestone but it is not a Bavarian is incorrect. fact16: This racker is a translucency. fact17: This racker patterns neuroblastoma. fact18: That prebendary does not press Ensis. fact19: This racker is not a kind of a deepness. fact20: This pothead is a merestone. fact21: If this drosophila does not toast Athene then this racker is shrinkable and it presses Ensis. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that this racker is shrinkable is not false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that this racker is shrinkable is not false.; fact7 & assump1 -> int1: This racker presses Ensis.; fact9 & fact6 -> int2: This racker does not press Ensis.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That if that that Robaxin nags centare but it does not antedate Stizidae does not hold then that Robaxin is not a puckishness does not hold.

¬(¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: If that Robaxin does nag centare and does not antedate Stizidae it is not a kind of a puckishness. fact2: If something does not nag centare then that thing is not a puckishness. fact3: This Haldol is non-nearsighted if the fact that this Haldol is revivalistic but the thing is not lithic is false. fact4: If that that Robaxin nags centare and this does antedate Stizidae is wrong this is not a puckishness. fact5: Somebody is a kind of a puckishness if that it nags centare and it does not antedate Stizidae does not hold. fact6: Something is not a puckishness if that that it nags centare and does not antedate Stizidae is true does not hold. fact7: If something nags centare and does not antedate Stizidae it is not a puckishness. fact8: If that Robaxin does not nag centare that Robaxin is not a puckishness. fact9: If the fact that something does sneak and it is cutaneous does not hold it is not loveable.

fact1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact2: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬({DF}{bs} & ¬{FQ}{bs}) -> ¬{EK}{bs} fact4: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact5: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact9: (x): ¬({BU}x & {HO}x) -> ¬{JF}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that Robaxin does nag centare and does not antedate Stizidae it is not a kind of a puckishness. fact2: If something does not nag centare then that thing is not a puckishness. fact3: This Haldol is non-nearsighted if the fact that this Haldol is revivalistic but the thing is not lithic is false. fact4: If that that Robaxin nags centare and this does antedate Stizidae is wrong this is not a puckishness. fact5: Somebody is a kind of a puckishness if that it nags centare and it does not antedate Stizidae does not hold. fact6: Something is not a puckishness if that that it nags centare and does not antedate Stizidae is true does not hold. fact7: If something nags centare and does not antedate Stizidae it is not a puckishness. fact8: If that Robaxin does not nag centare that Robaxin is not a puckishness. fact9: If the fact that something does sneak and it is cutaneous does not hold it is not loveable. ; $hypothesis$ = That if that that Robaxin nags centare but it does not antedate Stizidae does not hold then that Robaxin is not a puckishness does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that diva is a presidium is true.

{C}{a}

fact1: If something that is not a presidium is a dazzled then that diva does not post Ruskin. fact2: Some man does not compel orology but it is deist. fact3: Something is not a kind of a half but this thing is a kind of a Malthusianism. fact4: That diva is not a presidium if there is someone such that that she does not compel orology and is deist is right.

fact1: (x): (¬{C}x & {HB}x) -> ¬{CM}{a} fact2: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {B}x) fact3: (Ex): (¬{IK}x & {BP}x) fact4: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something that is not a presidium is a dazzled then that diva does not post Ruskin. fact2: Some man does not compel orology but it is deist. fact3: Something is not a kind of a half but this thing is a kind of a Malthusianism. fact4: That diva is not a presidium if there is someone such that that she does not compel orology and is deist is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That that diva is a presidium is true. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This nates does not detrain Kogia.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: If that grot does not debase this chanal debase but it is not unclothed. fact2: This chanal is not a Gelsemium. fact3: This chanal does debase but that one is not a kind of a Gelsemium. fact4: If that grot is unclothed and is not a kind of a platyrrhinian this nates detrains Kogia. fact5: Something participates and this thing does invade Afghanistan if this thing is not a mutter. fact6: If that this chanal debases and is not a Gelsemium is correct it is not unclothed. fact7: That grot is not a platyrrhinian. fact8: If this chanal does debase and is not a platyrrhinian then this chanal is not unclothed. fact9: This nates is a kind of a Gelsemium. fact10: The fact that this nates does not detrain Kogia hold if this chanal does not detrain Kogia and is not a platyrrhinian. fact11: Something does not lecture mumpsimus and is unclothed if it participates. fact12: That grot does not debase if that grot is unclothed and does not detrain Kogia. fact13: This chanal is not unclothed if it debases and it is a Gelsemium. fact14: That grot is unclothed and is not a kind of a platyrrhinian if this chanal is not unclothed.

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

This nates does not detrain Kogia.

¬{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that grot does not debase this chanal debase but it is not unclothed. fact2: This chanal is not a Gelsemium. fact3: This chanal does debase but that one is not a kind of a Gelsemium. fact4: If that grot is unclothed and is not a kind of a platyrrhinian this nates detrains Kogia. fact5: Something participates and this thing does invade Afghanistan if this thing is not a mutter. fact6: If that this chanal debases and is not a Gelsemium is correct it is not unclothed. fact7: That grot is not a platyrrhinian. fact8: If this chanal does debase and is not a platyrrhinian then this chanal is not unclothed. fact9: This nates is a kind of a Gelsemium. fact10: The fact that this nates does not detrain Kogia hold if this chanal does not detrain Kogia and is not a platyrrhinian. fact11: Something does not lecture mumpsimus and is unclothed if it participates. fact12: That grot does not debase if that grot is unclothed and does not detrain Kogia. fact13: This chanal is not unclothed if it debases and it is a Gelsemium. fact14: That grot is unclothed and is not a kind of a platyrrhinian if this chanal is not unclothed. ; $hypothesis$ = This nates does not detrain Kogia. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> int1: This chanal is not unclothed.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That grot is unclothed but it is not a kind of a platyrrhinian.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this Malteseness does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: If that declawing mariachi does not occurs the fact that this EW does not occurs and that ripeness does not occurs is not correct. fact2: This Malteseness does not occurs if the fact that that ripeness does not occurs and this Malteseness occurs is incorrect. fact3: That televangelism does not happens and that disrupting Flindersia does not occurs if the fact that this porn occurs is correct. fact4: That Montserratianness occurs if that this Malteseness does not happens but this EW happens is not correct. fact5: That ripeness does not occurs. fact6: This Malteseness does not occurs if that this EW does not occurs and that ripeness does not happens is incorrect. fact7: That that declawing mariachi does not happens and that ripeness happens is triggered by that that daunting gangland happens. fact8: That this superiorness and that unsystematicness happens is caused by that that televangelism does not happens. fact9: That this currycombing Stellaria does not occurs results in that that bearing occurs or that lexicography or both. fact10: If that that the unfreeness and this milling Scirpus happens is right is false this decline does not happens. fact11: If this decline does not happens then both this porn and that seductiveness happens. fact12: If the hyoid does not happens the fact that the junction does not occurs and the questioning does not occurs does not hold. fact13: The attaching reputation does not happens and that necroticness does not happens. fact14: The doubleness does not happens and the active does not happens. fact15: The fact that the fisheyeness does not occurs and this swimming does not happens does not hold. fact16: The fact that notthis Malteseness but this EW occurs is incorrect if that ripeness occurs. fact17: The creeping polysyndeton does not happens. fact18: That that daunting gangland happens yields that that declawing mariachi does not happens. fact19: That the fact that this freeness does not occurs and this milling Scirpus happens is right does not hold if that that pifflinging occurs is right. fact20: The fact that this EW does not happens is right. fact21: That daunting gangland happens if this superiorness happens.

fact1: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) fact2: ¬(¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact3: {J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) fact4: ¬(¬{B} & {A}) -> {FE} fact5: ¬{C} fact6: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact7: {E} -> (¬{D} & {C}) fact8: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact9: ¬{R} -> ({Q} v {P}) fact10: ¬(¬{M} & {N}) -> ¬{L} fact11: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact12: ¬{FD} -> ¬(¬{HC} & ¬{EJ}) fact13: (¬{FA} & ¬{BT}) fact14: (¬{AE} & ¬{DP}) fact15: ¬(¬{DC} & ¬{DN}) fact16: {C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) fact17: ¬{BA} fact18: {E} -> ¬{D} fact19: {O} -> ¬(¬{M} & {N}) fact20: ¬{A} fact21: {F} -> {E}

That Montserratianness happens.

{FE}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that declawing mariachi does not occurs the fact that this EW does not occurs and that ripeness does not occurs is not correct. fact2: This Malteseness does not occurs if the fact that that ripeness does not occurs and this Malteseness occurs is incorrect. fact3: That televangelism does not happens and that disrupting Flindersia does not occurs if the fact that this porn occurs is correct. fact4: That Montserratianness occurs if that this Malteseness does not happens but this EW happens is not correct. fact5: That ripeness does not occurs. fact6: This Malteseness does not occurs if that this EW does not occurs and that ripeness does not happens is incorrect. fact7: That that declawing mariachi does not happens and that ripeness happens is triggered by that that daunting gangland happens. fact8: That this superiorness and that unsystematicness happens is caused by that that televangelism does not happens. fact9: That this currycombing Stellaria does not occurs results in that that bearing occurs or that lexicography or both. fact10: If that that the unfreeness and this milling Scirpus happens is right is false this decline does not happens. fact11: If this decline does not happens then both this porn and that seductiveness happens. fact12: If the hyoid does not happens the fact that the junction does not occurs and the questioning does not occurs does not hold. fact13: The attaching reputation does not happens and that necroticness does not happens. fact14: The doubleness does not happens and the active does not happens. fact15: The fact that the fisheyeness does not occurs and this swimming does not happens does not hold. fact16: The fact that notthis Malteseness but this EW occurs is incorrect if that ripeness occurs. fact17: The creeping polysyndeton does not happens. fact18: That that daunting gangland happens yields that that declawing mariachi does not happens. fact19: That the fact that this freeness does not occurs and this milling Scirpus happens is right does not hold if that that pifflinging occurs is right. fact20: The fact that this EW does not happens is right. fact21: That daunting gangland happens if this superiorness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this Malteseness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That asyndeticness does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: That both the demonstrativeness and that droning happens does not hold if that bargain happens. fact2: That asyndeticness does not occurs if that commutableness and this imploring happens. fact3: That bargain happens if the fact that the piloting but notthat bargain occurs does not hold. fact4: If that notthat undemonstrativeness but that droning happens is wrong then that undemonstrativeness happens. fact5: This puking babble occurs. fact6: The fact that the piloting occurs and that bargain does not happens does not hold if that firestorm happens. fact7: That undemonstrativeness happens. fact8: If that droning but notthat firestorm occurs that bargain happens. fact9: That commutableness happens if this puking babble happens. fact10: If both that guttural and the derision occurs this clerkship does not happens. fact11: The fact that notthat asyndeticness but that commutableness occurs does not hold if this imploring does not happens. fact12: That bargain yields that that undemonstrativeness does not occurs and this imploring does not happens. fact13: Both this imploring and that undemonstrativeness occurs.

fact1: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {G}) fact2: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact3: ¬({I} & ¬{F}) -> {F} fact4: ¬(¬{E} & {G}) -> {E} fact5: {A} fact6: {H} -> ¬({I} & ¬{F}) fact7: {E} fact8: ({G} & ¬{H}) -> {F} fact9: {A} -> {B} fact10: ({JK} & {HE}) -> ¬{CH} fact11: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{D} & {B}) fact12: {F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{C}) fact13: ({C} & {E})

This clerkship happens.

{CH}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both the demonstrativeness and that droning happens does not hold if that bargain happens. fact2: That asyndeticness does not occurs if that commutableness and this imploring happens. fact3: That bargain happens if the fact that the piloting but notthat bargain occurs does not hold. fact4: If that notthat undemonstrativeness but that droning happens is wrong then that undemonstrativeness happens. fact5: This puking babble occurs. fact6: The fact that the piloting occurs and that bargain does not happens does not hold if that firestorm happens. fact7: That undemonstrativeness happens. fact8: If that droning but notthat firestorm occurs that bargain happens. fact9: That commutableness happens if this puking babble happens. fact10: If both that guttural and the derision occurs this clerkship does not happens. fact11: The fact that notthat asyndeticness but that commutableness occurs does not hold if this imploring does not happens. fact12: That bargain yields that that undemonstrativeness does not occurs and this imploring does not happens. fact13: Both this imploring and that undemonstrativeness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That asyndeticness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact5 -> int1: That commutableness occurs.; fact13 -> int2: The fact that this imploring happens is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That commutableness occurs and this imploring happens.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this decolourising gruesomeness does not happens and this Lightness happens is wrong.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: That both the conquest and this Romanizing happens is caused by that this purring sevensome does not occurs. fact2: If the conquest occurs then the fact that notthis decolourising gruesomeness but this Lightness occurs does not hold. fact3: That Bush does not happens but that Booking incorrectness occurs. fact4: This decolourising gruesomeness does not occurs but this Lightness occurs. fact5: Notthe colorizing Charadriidae but the infinitivalness occurs. fact6: The hazarding does not happens and the number happens. fact7: Notthe centralistness but the exteriorization occurs. fact8: This Lightness happens. fact9: That colorimetricness does not happens but that debating signalisation happens. fact10: The unprincipledness does not happens but that debating signalisation occurs.

fact1: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact2: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact3: (¬{FP} & {BH}) fact4: (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact5: (¬{IB} & {P}) fact6: (¬{FU} & {G}) fact7: (¬{FD} & {JA}) fact8: {AB} fact9: (¬{DM} & {BA}) fact10: (¬{CP} & {BA})

The fact that this decolourising gruesomeness does not happens and this Lightness happens is wrong.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both the conquest and this Romanizing happens is caused by that this purring sevensome does not occurs. fact2: If the conquest occurs then the fact that notthis decolourising gruesomeness but this Lightness occurs does not hold. fact3: That Bush does not happens but that Booking incorrectness occurs. fact4: This decolourising gruesomeness does not occurs but this Lightness occurs. fact5: Notthe colorizing Charadriidae but the infinitivalness occurs. fact6: The hazarding does not happens and the number happens. fact7: Notthe centralistness but the exteriorization occurs. fact8: This Lightness happens. fact9: That colorimetricness does not happens but that debating signalisation happens. fact10: The unprincipledness does not happens but that debating signalisation occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this decolourising gruesomeness does not happens and this Lightness happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This echtness happens and this sidearmness happens.

({C} & {D})

fact1: That this roll occurs and this dunging Dangla occurs does not hold if this Aristotelicness does not occurs. fact2: Both the stalking and this empiricness occurs. fact3: The fact that this dunging Dangla does not occurs is correct if that this roll and this dunging Dangla occurs is not correct. fact4: That both this echtness and this sidearmness occurs is false if this assistance does not occurs. fact5: Either the encoring happens or that bower occurs or both. fact6: This shaking happens. fact7: This roll occurs. fact8: If this assistance happens then the fact that this echtness happens is true. fact9: This sidearmness occurs and this roll happens. fact10: That speaking Appleton and the campaign happens. fact11: If this dunging Dangla happens this echtness occurs. fact12: The fact that both this assistance and this dunging Dangla occurs is wrong if this roll does not happens.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {B}) fact2: ({IC} & {HD}) fact3: ¬({E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact5: ({FF} v {BE}) fact6: {EK} fact7: {E} fact8: {A} -> {C} fact9: ({D} & {E}) fact10: ({HR} & {HI}) fact11: {B} -> {C} fact12: ¬{E} -> ¬({A} & {B})

Both that maturing secularism and that projection occurs.

({EO} & {EB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this roll occurs and this dunging Dangla occurs does not hold if this Aristotelicness does not occurs. fact2: Both the stalking and this empiricness occurs. fact3: The fact that this dunging Dangla does not occurs is correct if that this roll and this dunging Dangla occurs is not correct. fact4: That both this echtness and this sidearmness occurs is false if this assistance does not occurs. fact5: Either the encoring happens or that bower occurs or both. fact6: This shaking happens. fact7: This roll occurs. fact8: If this assistance happens then the fact that this echtness happens is true. fact9: This sidearmness occurs and this roll happens. fact10: That speaking Appleton and the campaign happens. fact11: If this dunging Dangla happens this echtness occurs. fact12: The fact that both this assistance and this dunging Dangla occurs is wrong if this roll does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This echtness happens and this sidearmness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This monstrosity is a clew and is not an inequity.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: Somebody is nonlinguistic but it is not a kind of a lateral if that it is a Tampere hold. fact2: The fact that if this monstrosity is not a memo that that weald corresponds and is a Tampere is correct is correct. fact3: If that this monstrosity is not a Avahi but a memo is false then this monstrosity is not a memo. fact4: This monstrosity is a Tampere. fact5: If some person is not a carousing then that he is not a kind of a Avahi and he is a kind of a memo is wrong.

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

That that weald is nonlinguistic but that is not a lateral hold.

({JJ}{cl} & ¬{AR}{cl})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is nonlinguistic but it is not a kind of a lateral if that it is a Tampere hold. fact2: The fact that if this monstrosity is not a memo that that weald corresponds and is a Tampere is correct is correct. fact3: If that this monstrosity is not a Avahi but a memo is false then this monstrosity is not a memo. fact4: This monstrosity is a Tampere. fact5: If some person is not a carousing then that he is not a kind of a Avahi and he is a kind of a memo is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This monstrosity is a clew and is not an inequity. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This calyculateness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: This priestliness does not happens. fact2: That carnivorousness happens. fact3: If both that relaxing braille and that carnivorousness occurs then the fact that this calyculateness does not occurs hold. fact4: That that cascade occurs is not incorrect. fact5: If the fossilizing paregmenon occurs and the finding occurs then the fact that that crashing does not happens is true. fact6: This parallel happens. fact7: That that astrolatry does not happens is correct if both that Protestantness and that prodigy happens. fact8: That relaxing braille happens and this parallel happens if that carnivorousness does not happens. fact9: This parallel occurs and that relaxing braille happens. fact10: That housing happens if that that housing does not happens and that relaxing braille does not happens is incorrect. fact11: That that housing does not happens and that relaxing braille does not happens is not correct if this incredibleness occurs.

fact1: ¬{AK} fact2: {C} fact3: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact4: {R} fact5: ({CQ} & {EL}) -> ¬{AR} fact6: {A} fact7: ({ID} & {IM}) -> ¬{BB} fact8: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact9: ({A} & {B}) fact10: ¬(¬{AM} & ¬{B}) -> {AM} fact11: {G} -> ¬(¬{AM} & ¬{B})

That housing and this fortifying untrustworthiness happens.

({AM} & {BT})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This priestliness does not happens. fact2: That carnivorousness happens. fact3: If both that relaxing braille and that carnivorousness occurs then the fact that this calyculateness does not occurs hold. fact4: That that cascade occurs is not incorrect. fact5: If the fossilizing paregmenon occurs and the finding occurs then the fact that that crashing does not happens is true. fact6: This parallel happens. fact7: That that astrolatry does not happens is correct if both that Protestantness and that prodigy happens. fact8: That relaxing braille happens and this parallel happens if that carnivorousness does not happens. fact9: This parallel occurs and that relaxing braille happens. fact10: That housing happens if that that housing does not happens and that relaxing braille does not happens is incorrect. fact11: That that housing does not happens and that relaxing braille does not happens is not correct if this incredibleness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This calyculateness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: The fact that that relaxing braille occurs hold.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That relaxing braille happens and that carnivorousness happens.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that forequarter is a kind of biflagellate thing that does not coruscate Parnaiba is not correct.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: The fact that the bichromate canalizes gesticulation and she is prescriptive is not true. fact2: If something is not a kind of a pander then it is biflagellate and it does not coruscate Parnaiba. fact3: If something is a kind of a pander then the fact that it is Celtic and it does not coruscate Parnaiba is wrong. fact4: If the fact that that coon does not halve dermatomyositis and is a alloyed is right that forequarter is a alloyed. fact5: If something is a Volapuk then this is a pander. fact6: Some man is not a pander if it is a alloyed and it is not a Volapuk. fact7: Someone is a kind of a Volapuk and that one is a alloyed if that one is not a Cavendish. fact8: The fact that that forequarter is a kind of biflagellate thing that does not coruscate Parnaiba is not correct.

fact1: ¬({CQ}{do} & {AL}{do}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (x): {A}x -> ¬({DJ}x & ¬{AB}x) fact4: (¬{F}{c} & {C}{c}) -> {C}{a} fact5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact6: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact8: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

That forequarter is biflagellate but it does not coruscate Parnaiba.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the bichromate canalizes gesticulation and she is prescriptive is not true. fact2: If something is not a kind of a pander then it is biflagellate and it does not coruscate Parnaiba. fact3: If something is a kind of a pander then the fact that it is Celtic and it does not coruscate Parnaiba is wrong. fact4: If the fact that that coon does not halve dermatomyositis and is a alloyed is right that forequarter is a alloyed. fact5: If something is a Volapuk then this is a pander. fact6: Some man is not a pander if it is a alloyed and it is not a Volapuk. fact7: Someone is a kind of a Volapuk and that one is a alloyed if that one is not a Cavendish. fact8: The fact that that forequarter is a kind of biflagellate thing that does not coruscate Parnaiba is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that forequarter is a kind of biflagellate thing that does not coruscate Parnaiba is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

There exists something such that if that it is a kind of a hedged that do notwnplay punctiliousness does not hold it is not choleraic.

(Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

fact1: There exists something such that if it downplays punctiliousness then it is not choleraic. fact2: If that some man is a kind of a tenting that does not telecast piffle is false then it does not savor Trichiuridae. fact3: If that the barracouta is a hedged that do notwnplay punctiliousness is incorrect this one is not choleraic.

fact1: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x fact2: (x): ¬({FC}x & ¬{R}x) -> ¬{C}x fact3: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

The clementine does not savor Trichiuridae if that it is a tenting and does not telecast piffle is incorrect.

¬({FC}{fj} & ¬{R}{fj}) -> ¬{C}{fj}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that if it downplays punctiliousness then it is not choleraic. fact2: If that some man is a kind of a tenting that does not telecast piffle is false then it does not savor Trichiuridae. fact3: If that the barracouta is a hedged that do notwnplay punctiliousness is incorrect this one is not choleraic. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists something such that if that it is a kind of a hedged that do notwnplay punctiliousness does not hold it is not choleraic. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Everybody is a kind of a Hepaticae.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everything is a pastel. fact2: Everybody is a kind of a Hepaticae. fact3: If the fact that something is postnuptial and this thing touches expensiveness is wrong this thing is not tzarist. fact4: The fact that someone is postnuptial and does touch expensiveness does not hold if this person is not a Catharacta. fact5: Everyone is returnable. fact6: Every person is a correlate.

fact1: (x): {FO}x fact2: (x): {A}x fact3: (x): ¬({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({C}x & {D}x) fact5: (x): {HP}x fact6: (x): {CS}x

Everything is a asystole.

(x): {GE}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a pastel. fact2: Everybody is a kind of a Hepaticae. fact3: If the fact that something is postnuptial and this thing touches expensiveness is wrong this thing is not tzarist. fact4: The fact that someone is postnuptial and does touch expensiveness does not hold if this person is not a Catharacta. fact5: Everyone is returnable. fact6: Every person is a correlate. ; $hypothesis$ = Everybody is a kind of a Hepaticae. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This centrist is not a haggard and the thing is not a kind of a Rhodesia.

(¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

fact1: If this lyricist is not a Loki then either Tino is a homophone or it does not overbid Digitaria or both. fact2: If that dishwater is not a Scleropages and is a Alcaic that this groundling does not excuse Huygens hold. fact3: The fact that this centrist is not a haggard and it is not a Rhodesia is incorrect if this escherichia is not a haggard. fact4: This tricot is not a kind of a paraphrenia but she/he solarizes constructivism if she/he is a homophone. fact5: That handiwork is a kind of a Devanagari and he/she does cause Yahve if he/she is nontoxic. fact6: If that handiwork does not pamper pun that handiwork is a kind of a matching and/or it is abbatial. fact7: If that handiwork is a kind of a matching then he/she is not toxic. fact8: If some person is a Paliurus it is not a kind of a haggard and is not a Rhodesia. fact9: If that handiwork is abbatial then she/he is nontoxic. fact10: This escherichia is not a kind of a homophone if Tino is a homophone. fact11: If this escherichia is not a kind of a homophone then this tricot is a homophone. fact12: This tricot is a Paliurus. fact13: That handiwork does not pamper pun. fact14: If that handiwork is a kind of a Devanagari that dishwater is not a Scleropages and is a kind of a Alcaic. fact15: If this tricot is a Paliurus and it solarizes constructivism then this escherichia is not a haggard. fact16: This tricot solarizes constructivism. fact17: This lyricist is not a Loki if that this groundling is not a Loki but this thing is acapnic does not hold. fact18: the constructivism solarizes tricot. fact19: That if something does not excuse Huygens then that it is not a kind of a Loki and it is acapnic does not hold hold.

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

This centrist is not a haggard and the thing is not a kind of a Rhodesia.

(¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this lyricist is not a Loki then either Tino is a homophone or it does not overbid Digitaria or both. fact2: If that dishwater is not a Scleropages and is a Alcaic that this groundling does not excuse Huygens hold. fact3: The fact that this centrist is not a haggard and it is not a Rhodesia is incorrect if this escherichia is not a haggard. fact4: This tricot is not a kind of a paraphrenia but she/he solarizes constructivism if she/he is a homophone. fact5: That handiwork is a kind of a Devanagari and he/she does cause Yahve if he/she is nontoxic. fact6: If that handiwork does not pamper pun that handiwork is a kind of a matching and/or it is abbatial. fact7: If that handiwork is a kind of a matching then he/she is not toxic. fact8: If some person is a Paliurus it is not a kind of a haggard and is not a Rhodesia. fact9: If that handiwork is abbatial then she/he is nontoxic. fact10: This escherichia is not a kind of a homophone if Tino is a homophone. fact11: If this escherichia is not a kind of a homophone then this tricot is a homophone. fact12: This tricot is a Paliurus. fact13: That handiwork does not pamper pun. fact14: If that handiwork is a kind of a Devanagari that dishwater is not a Scleropages and is a kind of a Alcaic. fact15: If this tricot is a Paliurus and it solarizes constructivism then this escherichia is not a haggard. fact16: This tricot solarizes constructivism. fact17: This lyricist is not a Loki if that this groundling is not a Loki but this thing is acapnic does not hold. fact18: the constructivism solarizes tricot. fact19: That if something does not excuse Huygens then that it is not a kind of a Loki and it is acapnic does not hold hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This centrist is not a haggard and the thing is not a kind of a Rhodesia. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact16 -> int1: This tricot is a kind of a Paliurus and solarizes constructivism.; int1 & fact15 -> int2: This escherichia is not a kind of a haggard.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__