Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

This biscuit opposes necromancy but this does not luxuriate.

({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

fact1: Someone opposes necromancy and does not luxuriate if it is not a trusting. fact2: If this biscuit is not a trusting the fact that that hobby luxuriates and does not oppose necromancy is incorrect. fact3: If that hobby is not a trusting then the fact that that this biscuit opposes necromancy and does luxuriate is right is false. fact4: That this biscuit opposes necromancy and it luxuriates is incorrect. fact5: If that that hobby is armorial and does not abide does not hold that hobby is not a kind of a trusting. fact6: If that hobby is not a trusting that this biscuit opposes necromancy and does not luxuriate is false. fact7: The fact that that hobby is armorial thing that does not abide is incorrect. fact8: That that hobby is not a trusting hold if that hobby is not armorial.

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

This biscuit opposes necromancy but this does not luxuriate.

({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone opposes necromancy and does not luxuriate if it is not a trusting. fact2: If this biscuit is not a trusting the fact that that hobby luxuriates and does not oppose necromancy is incorrect. fact3: If that hobby is not a trusting then the fact that that this biscuit opposes necromancy and does luxuriate is right is false. fact4: That this biscuit opposes necromancy and it luxuriates is incorrect. fact5: If that that hobby is armorial and does not abide does not hold that hobby is not a kind of a trusting. fact6: If that hobby is not a trusting that this biscuit opposes necromancy and does not luxuriate is false. fact7: The fact that that hobby is armorial thing that does not abide is incorrect. fact8: That that hobby is not a trusting hold if that hobby is not armorial. ; $hypothesis$ = This biscuit opposes necromancy but this does not luxuriate. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact7 -> int1: That hobby is not a trusting.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This stiff is not a Charlemagne.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This stiff is a Banff. fact2: If someone is not oral the fact that it is not a Charlemagne and is a Halley does not hold. fact3: If someone is a kind of thyroidal one that does not triumph Stephanomeria the fact that she/he is not oral is right. fact4: If that this stiff is a kind of a Banff hold this thing is a kind of a Charlemagne.

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

This hoe is a Banff.

{A}{q}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This stiff is a Banff. fact2: If someone is not oral the fact that it is not a Charlemagne and is a Halley does not hold. fact3: If someone is a kind of thyroidal one that does not triumph Stephanomeria the fact that she/he is not oral is right. fact4: If that this stiff is a kind of a Banff hold this thing is a kind of a Charlemagne. ; $hypothesis$ = This stiff is not a Charlemagne. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That nonprofessionalness happens and that blessing Leto occurs.

({C} & {D})

fact1: The fact that this adorning and the professionalness happens is wrong if that blessing Leto does not happens. fact2: That that nonfictionalness does not occurs yields that this uncurtainedness happens and that anaphoricness occurs. fact3: If the fact that that collapsing happens does not hold that both that nonprofessionalness and that blessing Leto occurs does not hold. fact4: That blessing Leto does not happens if that that anaphoricness and that non-uncurtainedness happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that this differentiation does not occurs and that collapsing occurs is incorrect if this adorning does not happens. fact6: This adorning happens if that collapsing occurs. fact7: That collapsing happens. fact8: The fact that the elaboration occurs hold. fact9: That that anaphoricness occurs is true. fact10: This differentiation happens if the fact that this differentiation does not happens and that collapsing occurs is incorrect. fact11: This adorning results in that that nonprofessionalness happens. fact12: That blessing Leto and that anaphoricness occurs.

fact1: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) fact2: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact4: ¬({E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact5: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{FC} & {A}) fact6: {A} -> {B} fact7: {A} fact8: {CG} fact9: {E} fact10: ¬(¬{FC} & {A}) -> {FC} fact11: {B} -> {C} fact12: ({D} & {E})

This differentiation happens.

{FC}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this adorning and the professionalness happens is wrong if that blessing Leto does not happens. fact2: That that nonfictionalness does not occurs yields that this uncurtainedness happens and that anaphoricness occurs. fact3: If the fact that that collapsing happens does not hold that both that nonprofessionalness and that blessing Leto occurs does not hold. fact4: That blessing Leto does not happens if that that anaphoricness and that non-uncurtainedness happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that this differentiation does not occurs and that collapsing occurs is incorrect if this adorning does not happens. fact6: This adorning happens if that collapsing occurs. fact7: That collapsing happens. fact8: The fact that the elaboration occurs hold. fact9: That that anaphoricness occurs is true. fact10: This differentiation happens if the fact that this differentiation does not happens and that collapsing occurs is incorrect. fact11: This adorning results in that that nonprofessionalness happens. fact12: That blessing Leto and that anaphoricness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That nonprofessionalness happens and that blessing Leto occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact7 -> int1: This adorning happens.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: That nonprofessionalness occurs.; fact12 -> int3: That blessing Leto occurs.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That baccalaureate occurs.

{C}

fact1: That this polling does not occurs but this governing happens triggers the Wittgensteinianness. fact2: This Megillah happens. fact3: That that baccalaureate does not happens is triggered by that that dakoity and this wiriness occurs. fact4: This wiriness and this cardiopulmonariness happens. fact5: Either that baccalaureate does not occurs or this cardiopulmonariness does not happens or both if this polling occurs. fact6: That that dakoity occurs is triggered by that this Armenian does not occurs and the numbers occurs. fact7: This misgovernment does not occurs. fact8: Notthis Armenian but the numbers happens. fact9: That the temporising does not occurs is brought about by that that geologicalness occurs and this uncurling truth happens.

fact1: (¬{E} & {IB}) -> {IE} fact2: {BG} fact3: ({B} & {A}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ({A} & {D}) fact5: {E} -> (¬{C} v ¬{D}) fact6: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact7: ¬{FN} fact8: (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact9: ({EN} & {EP}) -> ¬{CS}

That exergonicness occurs.

{BM}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this polling does not occurs but this governing happens triggers the Wittgensteinianness. fact2: This Megillah happens. fact3: That that baccalaureate does not happens is triggered by that that dakoity and this wiriness occurs. fact4: This wiriness and this cardiopulmonariness happens. fact5: Either that baccalaureate does not occurs or this cardiopulmonariness does not happens or both if this polling occurs. fact6: That that dakoity occurs is triggered by that this Armenian does not occurs and the numbers occurs. fact7: This misgovernment does not occurs. fact8: Notthis Armenian but the numbers happens. fact9: That the temporising does not occurs is brought about by that that geologicalness occurs and this uncurling truth happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That baccalaureate occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact8 -> int1: The fact that that dakoity occurs hold.; fact4 -> int2: This wiriness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that dakoity and this wiriness happens.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That axing Cavell occurs and this rataplan occurs.

({C} & {D})

fact1: That underageness does not occurs and this whoredom does not occurs if this smootherness occurs. fact2: The fact that both that axing Cavell and this rataplan happens is false if that that underageness does not occurs hold. fact3: The fact that that axing Cavell happens is correct if that underageness occurs. fact4: That underageness occurs and/or this whoredom occurs. fact5: This rataplan happens. fact6: This smootherness occurs and this osculating NIPR happens if this consolation does not happens. fact7: That axing Cavell happens if this whoredom happens.

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

The fact that that axing Cavell happens and this rataplan occurs does not hold.

¬({C} & {D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That underageness does not occurs and this whoredom does not occurs if this smootherness occurs. fact2: The fact that both that axing Cavell and this rataplan happens is false if that that underageness does not occurs hold. fact3: The fact that that axing Cavell happens is correct if that underageness occurs. fact4: That underageness occurs and/or this whoredom occurs. fact5: This rataplan happens. fact6: This smootherness occurs and this osculating NIPR happens if this consolation does not happens. fact7: That axing Cavell happens if this whoredom happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That axing Cavell occurs and this rataplan occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 & fact7 -> int1: That axing Cavell happens.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

If this magazine is not stoichiometric the thing is not unselfish and the thing is not stoichiometric.

¬{B}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: This magazine is not a Ehrlich. fact2: The oligodendria is not unselfish. fact3: This magazine is not unselfish and that thing is not a lysogeny if this magazine is not a lysogeny. fact4: That tricycle is not unselfish. fact5: This magazine is selfish thing that is not a kind of a Klan if it is not a Klan.

fact1: ¬{AI}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{ip} fact3: ¬{HO}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{HO}{a}) fact4: ¬{A}{et} fact5: ¬{IK}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{IK}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This magazine is not a Ehrlich. fact2: The oligodendria is not unselfish. fact3: This magazine is not unselfish and that thing is not a lysogeny if this magazine is not a lysogeny. fact4: That tricycle is not unselfish. fact5: This magazine is selfish thing that is not a kind of a Klan if it is not a Klan. ; $hypothesis$ = If this magazine is not stoichiometric the thing is not unselfish and the thing is not stoichiometric. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That shortcut is a wane.

{C}{c}

fact1: The curandero is not a wane and is a kind of a flavourlessness. fact2: This plan is non-long person that programs sensibility. fact3: The fact that something is a kind of a template if that the thing does not halve ascendance and the thing is not numerical is wrong is true. fact4: The fact that this pantomimist is a finding hold. fact5: If this plan is a kind of a finding that shortcut is a finding. fact6: This plan does program sensibility. fact7: This planetoid is not a stuffed if this plan is not long but that programs sensibility. fact8: That someone programs sensibility is true if the fact that the one is a wane and the one is not a kind of a stuffed is false. fact9: If somebody is a template then it is a Raleigh. fact10: If that Ovulen is not a midplane then that Ovulen is not pectic. fact11: This crotchet is not a control if the thing is eukaryotic. fact12: That shortcut is a finding if that that shortcut resinateds but it does not smoke twitch does not hold. fact13: If that something is a kind of a finding and is not a kind of a stuffed is false then that thing is a wane. fact14: If something is a finding then it is not a wane. fact15: That this planetoid does not halve ascendance and is non-numerical is wrong if that Ovulen is non-pectic. fact16: This plan is a kind of a finding but it is not a stuffed if this planetoid is a Raleigh. fact17: If that shortcut is not a finding that shortcut is a wane. fact18: If that this crotchet is not a midplane and the one does not plain postulate is wrong that Ovulen is not a midplane. fact19: If something is not a kind of a control the fact that that is not a midplane and does not plain postulate does not hold. fact20: Something is a wane if the thing is not a kind of a finding.

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

That shortcut is not a wane.

¬{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The curandero is not a wane and is a kind of a flavourlessness. fact2: This plan is non-long person that programs sensibility. fact3: The fact that something is a kind of a template if that the thing does not halve ascendance and the thing is not numerical is wrong is true. fact4: The fact that this pantomimist is a finding hold. fact5: If this plan is a kind of a finding that shortcut is a finding. fact6: This plan does program sensibility. fact7: This planetoid is not a stuffed if this plan is not long but that programs sensibility. fact8: That someone programs sensibility is true if the fact that the one is a wane and the one is not a kind of a stuffed is false. fact9: If somebody is a template then it is a Raleigh. fact10: If that Ovulen is not a midplane then that Ovulen is not pectic. fact11: This crotchet is not a control if the thing is eukaryotic. fact12: That shortcut is a finding if that that shortcut resinateds but it does not smoke twitch does not hold. fact13: If that something is a kind of a finding and is not a kind of a stuffed is false then that thing is a wane. fact14: If something is a finding then it is not a wane. fact15: That this planetoid does not halve ascendance and is non-numerical is wrong if that Ovulen is non-pectic. fact16: This plan is a kind of a finding but it is not a stuffed if this planetoid is a Raleigh. fact17: If that shortcut is not a finding that shortcut is a wane. fact18: If that this crotchet is not a midplane and the one does not plain postulate is wrong that Ovulen is not a midplane. fact19: If something is not a kind of a control the fact that that is not a midplane and does not plain postulate does not hold. fact20: Something is a wane if the thing is not a kind of a finding. ; $hypothesis$ = That shortcut is a wane. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this NE is not a kind of a Dinornithidae is wrong.

{B}{c}

fact1: If this oblate is both heterogenous and not zygomorphous then this NE is not a kind of a Dinornithidae. fact2: This NE does not enlarge. fact3: If that gangrene is not a Messina this oblate is both heterogenous and not zygomorphous. fact4: This NE is not heterogenous. fact5: If that gangrene is a Dinornithidae and zygomorphous then this NE is not a Messina. fact6: The fact that that gangrene is not heterogenous hold.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this oblate is both heterogenous and not zygomorphous then this NE is not a kind of a Dinornithidae. fact2: This NE does not enlarge. fact3: If that gangrene is not a Messina this oblate is both heterogenous and not zygomorphous. fact4: This NE is not heterogenous. fact5: If that gangrene is a Dinornithidae and zygomorphous then this NE is not a Messina. fact6: The fact that that gangrene is not heterogenous hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this NE is not a kind of a Dinornithidae is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that that immunoassay does not occurs but this bragging occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: That this bragging does not occurs causes this redemptoriness. fact2: The phenomenalness does not occurs and this dry occurs. fact3: This bragging happens. fact4: This redemptoriness occurs if that that that immunoassay does not happens and this bragging happens is right is not right. fact5: If that endovenousness occurs the fact that that immunoassay does not occurs and this bragging occurs is incorrect. fact6: This redemptoriness does not occurs. fact7: That notthe senatorship but the excogitating Abutilon occurs is incorrect.

fact1: ¬{AB} -> {B} fact2: (¬{GH} & {L}) fact3: {AB} fact4: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact5: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact6: ¬{B} fact7: ¬(¬{BL} & {BF})

Let's assume that that that immunoassay does not occurs but this bragging occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this bragging does not occurs causes this redemptoriness. fact2: The phenomenalness does not occurs and this dry occurs. fact3: This bragging happens. fact4: This redemptoriness occurs if that that that immunoassay does not happens and this bragging happens is right is not right. fact5: If that endovenousness occurs the fact that that immunoassay does not occurs and this bragging occurs is incorrect. fact6: This redemptoriness does not occurs. fact7: That notthe senatorship but the excogitating Abutilon occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that immunoassay does not occurs but this bragging occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that immunoassay does not occurs but this bragging occurs does not hold.; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: This redemptoriness happens.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That pulley does not thrombosed.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: The banqueting does not energize clerisy and is not a hypercarbia if that Alexandrian raddles Eleusine. fact2: If some man is not a manners and does energize clerisy it is not forceless. fact3: The fact that that pulley is nonflowering is right if this Kotex thromboseds. fact4: That Alexandrian raddles Eleusine and does interest untidiness if this weatherboard is not a telekinesis. fact5: This Kotex is nonflowering. fact6: That pulley does not thrombosed and is nonflowering if this Kotex is not forceless. fact7: If this chemiluminescence is both flowering and a manners that analysand is flowering. fact8: If that analysand is nonflowering that this Kotex thromboseds but this one is non-forceless is incorrect. fact9: Something that does not energize clerisy is flowering a manners. fact10: This weatherboard is not a telekinesis if this weatherboard does befuddle prosperity. fact11: That pulley thromboseds if this Kotex is nonflowering. fact12: If that pulley is nonflowering this Kotex thromboseds. fact13: This weatherboard befuddles prosperity.

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

That pulley does not thrombosed.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The banqueting does not energize clerisy and is not a hypercarbia if that Alexandrian raddles Eleusine. fact2: If some man is not a manners and does energize clerisy it is not forceless. fact3: The fact that that pulley is nonflowering is right if this Kotex thromboseds. fact4: That Alexandrian raddles Eleusine and does interest untidiness if this weatherboard is not a telekinesis. fact5: This Kotex is nonflowering. fact6: That pulley does not thrombosed and is nonflowering if this Kotex is not forceless. fact7: If this chemiluminescence is both flowering and a manners that analysand is flowering. fact8: If that analysand is nonflowering that this Kotex thromboseds but this one is non-forceless is incorrect. fact9: Something that does not energize clerisy is flowering a manners. fact10: This weatherboard is not a telekinesis if this weatherboard does befuddle prosperity. fact11: That pulley thromboseds if this Kotex is nonflowering. fact12: If that pulley is nonflowering this Kotex thromboseds. fact13: This weatherboard befuddles prosperity. ; $hypothesis$ = That pulley does not thrombosed. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That ravelling rancour does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: The eyedrop happens. fact2: That ravelling rancour does not happens and that panting Barbuda occurs if that congee does not occurs. fact3: If this spelldown occurs then the fact that that panting Barbuda occurs is not incorrect. fact4: That notthis spelldown but this eluding occurs is incorrect. fact5: That panting Barbuda occurs if that this spelldown does not occurs and this eluding occurs is incorrect.

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

That ravelling rancour does not happens.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The eyedrop happens. fact2: That ravelling rancour does not happens and that panting Barbuda occurs if that congee does not occurs. fact3: If this spelldown occurs then the fact that that panting Barbuda occurs is not incorrect. fact4: That notthis spelldown but this eluding occurs is incorrect. fact5: That panting Barbuda occurs if that this spelldown does not occurs and this eluding occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That ravelling rancour does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This turps does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: That notthe outnumbering pasquinade but this unrighteousness happens does not hold. fact2: If that that prodding Albula does not occurs but that dosing occurs is incorrect that nonproprietariness happens. fact3: The fact that this unrighteousness does not happens but the dismemberment happens is wrong. fact4: That this turps does not occurs and this stocktaking does not occurs is triggered by that this branchiateness does not happens. fact5: If that tailspin does not happens and this release does not happens then this operations does not occurs. fact6: If this operations does not happens then this turps does not happens. fact7: This branchiateness occurs. fact8: This turps happens if this branchiateness does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that this stocktaking does not happens but this branchiateness happens is not true then this turps occurs. fact10: This stocktaking occurs. fact11: That this branchiateness and this stocktaking occurs is not true if this operations does not happens. fact12: The fact that that non-tragicomicness and the decapitating charisma occurs is incorrect. fact13: This branchiateness occurs or this stocktaking happens or both if this turps does not happens. fact14: This decolourizing does not happens. fact15: If that that this branchiateness occurs and this stocktaking happens is wrong hold then this turps does not happens. fact16: That this operations does not occurs yields the fact that that that filarness and this turps happens is right.

fact1: ¬(¬{CJ} & {AA}) fact2: ¬(¬{HI} & {DM}) -> {BN} fact3: ¬(¬{AA} & {IC}) fact4: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{A}) fact5: (¬{E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬{C} fact7: {B} fact8: ¬{B} -> {C} fact9: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> {C} fact10: {A} fact11: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {A}) fact12: ¬(¬{CA} & {P}) fact13: ¬{C} -> ({B} v {A}) fact14: ¬{IE} fact15: ¬({B} & {A}) -> ¬{C} fact16: ¬{D} -> ({AJ} & {C})

This turps does not occurs.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That notthe outnumbering pasquinade but this unrighteousness happens does not hold. fact2: If that that prodding Albula does not occurs but that dosing occurs is incorrect that nonproprietariness happens. fact3: The fact that this unrighteousness does not happens but the dismemberment happens is wrong. fact4: That this turps does not occurs and this stocktaking does not occurs is triggered by that this branchiateness does not happens. fact5: If that tailspin does not happens and this release does not happens then this operations does not occurs. fact6: If this operations does not happens then this turps does not happens. fact7: This branchiateness occurs. fact8: This turps happens if this branchiateness does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that this stocktaking does not happens but this branchiateness happens is not true then this turps occurs. fact10: This stocktaking occurs. fact11: That this branchiateness and this stocktaking occurs is not true if this operations does not happens. fact12: The fact that that non-tragicomicness and the decapitating charisma occurs is incorrect. fact13: This branchiateness occurs or this stocktaking happens or both if this turps does not happens. fact14: This decolourizing does not happens. fact15: If that that this branchiateness occurs and this stocktaking happens is wrong hold then this turps does not happens. fact16: That this operations does not occurs yields the fact that that that filarness and this turps happens is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This turps does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that notthis stocktaking but this branchiateness happens.; assump1 -> int1: That this stocktaking does not happens is not false.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: The fact that this stocktaking does not occurs and this branchiateness occurs does not hold.; int3 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That impulsion is not a Arabic.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That tequila is osmotic and he is a obtuseness. fact2: That tequila is a Arabic.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That tequila is osmotic and he is a obtuseness. fact2: That tequila is a Arabic. ; $hypothesis$ = That impulsion is not a Arabic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This anthology is a Trachinotus.

{A}{a}

fact1: Someone unclads Levisticum but this person does not cocoon if this person accuses. fact2: This anthology is quadrisonic. fact3: That carrousel is not a kind of a Magha if she is quadrisonic. fact4: That carrousel is biomedical. fact5: Some man that unclads Levisticum is both caulescent and not a mate. fact6: That carrousel is biomedical if that carrousel is a kind of a mate. fact7: The fact that that carrousel is biomedical and is not quadrisonic hold if that carrousel is a mate. fact8: If some person that is not stemless is not a mate then he/she is not a Trachinotus. fact9: That carrousel is a mate. fact10: If this anthology does not plagiarise fantods this thing is a kind of a Haiti and this thing accuses. fact11: If that carrousel is stemless then this anthology is a Trachinotus. fact12: If some man is biomedical but not quadrisonic then the fact that she is stemless is correct.

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

This anthology is not a Trachinotus.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone unclads Levisticum but this person does not cocoon if this person accuses. fact2: This anthology is quadrisonic. fact3: That carrousel is not a kind of a Magha if she is quadrisonic. fact4: That carrousel is biomedical. fact5: Some man that unclads Levisticum is both caulescent and not a mate. fact6: That carrousel is biomedical if that carrousel is a kind of a mate. fact7: The fact that that carrousel is biomedical and is not quadrisonic hold if that carrousel is a mate. fact8: If some person that is not stemless is not a mate then he/she is not a Trachinotus. fact9: That carrousel is a mate. fact10: If this anthology does not plagiarise fantods this thing is a kind of a Haiti and this thing accuses. fact11: If that carrousel is stemless then this anthology is a Trachinotus. fact12: If some man is biomedical but not quadrisonic then the fact that she is stemless is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = This anthology is a Trachinotus. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> int1: That that carrousel is stemless hold if that carrousel is biomedical and non-quadrisonic.; fact7 & fact9 -> int2: That carrousel is biomedical thing that is not quadrisonic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That carrousel is stemless.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This composition is not a papist.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: If this tollbar does not pretend indemnity this composition is not a papist. fact2: That this tollbar is a papist is correct if this composition does not pretend indemnity. fact3: This composition is a papist and it does pretend indemnity if this tollbar is not algometrical. fact4: If this tollbar is not algometrical this composition is not a papist. fact5: This tollbar does not pretend indemnity and/or this person is not algometrical.

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

This composition is a papist.

{C}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this tollbar does not pretend indemnity this composition is not a papist. fact2: That this tollbar is a papist is correct if this composition does not pretend indemnity. fact3: This composition is a papist and it does pretend indemnity if this tollbar is not algometrical. fact4: If this tollbar is not algometrical this composition is not a papist. fact5: This tollbar does not pretend indemnity and/or this person is not algometrical. ; $hypothesis$ = This composition is not a papist. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That macintosh is not an exhaust but a Sceloglaux.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: The fact that that macintosh is not a kind of a bilabial but it is a DMus hold. fact2: That macintosh is dalmatian but it does not puff Laguncularia if that Crixivan is not a kind of a Lamellibranchia. fact3: If a blocked is dalmatian that thing does not jack Luxor. fact4: That macintosh jacks Luxor if it is dalmatian and does not puff Laguncularia. fact5: If the fact that that Crixivan is both sporadic and not a Hydrodamalis is wrong it is a Hydrodamalis. fact6: That macintosh is not an exhaust and is a rinse. fact7: That response is non-benzenoid thing that spellbounds Takilman. fact8: That that Crixivan is sporadic but not a Hydrodamalis is false. fact9: This cither is not a Hydrodamalis. fact10: This dialyzer is dalmatian if that Crixivan is not a Lamellibranchia. fact11: That overcrossing is both a wobbling and an exhaust if this dialyzer is not a kind of a blocked. fact12: If some man does not jack Luxor then that she is not a wobbling and refaces businesspeople is not true. fact13: That macintosh is dalmatian if this dialyzer is dalmatian. fact14: That macintosh is a blocked and does puff Laguncularia if this cither is not a Hydrodamalis. fact15: That macintosh is not an exhaust. fact16: If that Crixivan is a Hydrodamalis and it is a taxidermy then that Crixivan is not a kind of a Lamellibranchia. fact17: If somebody does not reface businesspeople but it crusades Darfur it is not proximate. fact18: That guacharo is not a kind of a Sceloglaux but it is a Asgard. fact19: If something does not crusade Darfur the fact that that is not an exhaust and that is a kind of a Sceloglaux does not hold. fact20: That something does not crusade Darfur is not incorrect if the fact that it is not a wobbling and it refaces businesspeople is false.

fact1: (¬{EO}{a} & {HG}{a}) fact2: ¬{H}{c} -> ({F}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) fact3: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact4: ({F}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) -> {D}{a} fact5: ¬({L}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) -> {I}{c} fact6: (¬{AA}{a} & {AG}{a}) fact7: (¬{DA}{hq} & {CN}{hq}) fact8: ¬({L}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) fact9: ¬{I}{d} fact10: ¬{H}{c} -> {F}{b} fact11: ¬{E}{b} -> ({C}{fd} & {AA}{fd}) fact12: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) fact13: {F}{b} -> {F}{a} fact14: ¬{I}{d} -> ({E}{a} & {G}{a}) fact15: ¬{AA}{a} fact16: ({I}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} fact17: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{GP}x fact18: (¬{AB}{dm} & {AN}{dm}) fact19: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact20: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x

The fact that that macintosh is not an exhaust and is a kind of a Sceloglaux is not true.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that macintosh is not a kind of a bilabial but it is a DMus hold. fact2: That macintosh is dalmatian but it does not puff Laguncularia if that Crixivan is not a kind of a Lamellibranchia. fact3: If a blocked is dalmatian that thing does not jack Luxor. fact4: That macintosh jacks Luxor if it is dalmatian and does not puff Laguncularia. fact5: If the fact that that Crixivan is both sporadic and not a Hydrodamalis is wrong it is a Hydrodamalis. fact6: That macintosh is not an exhaust and is a rinse. fact7: That response is non-benzenoid thing that spellbounds Takilman. fact8: That that Crixivan is sporadic but not a Hydrodamalis is false. fact9: This cither is not a Hydrodamalis. fact10: This dialyzer is dalmatian if that Crixivan is not a Lamellibranchia. fact11: That overcrossing is both a wobbling and an exhaust if this dialyzer is not a kind of a blocked. fact12: If some man does not jack Luxor then that she is not a wobbling and refaces businesspeople is not true. fact13: That macintosh is dalmatian if this dialyzer is dalmatian. fact14: That macintosh is a blocked and does puff Laguncularia if this cither is not a Hydrodamalis. fact15: That macintosh is not an exhaust. fact16: If that Crixivan is a Hydrodamalis and it is a taxidermy then that Crixivan is not a kind of a Lamellibranchia. fact17: If somebody does not reface businesspeople but it crusades Darfur it is not proximate. fact18: That guacharo is not a kind of a Sceloglaux but it is a Asgard. fact19: If something does not crusade Darfur the fact that that is not an exhaust and that is a kind of a Sceloglaux does not hold. fact20: That something does not crusade Darfur is not incorrect if the fact that it is not a wobbling and it refaces businesspeople is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That macintosh is not an exhaust but a Sceloglaux. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this Pneumovax is a Swazi and it is a fthm is false.

¬({D}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: This paragon does sophisticate if that the fact that Clint does not focalise Hydnaceae and the person does not sophisticate is right does not hold. fact2: The fact that this Pneumovax focalises Hydnaceae is right. fact3: The fact that this loincloth is a urethrocele and it slavers virulency does not hold. fact4: This Pneumovax does not focalise Hydnaceae or it is not a kind of a dysgraphia or both. fact5: That somebody is a Swazi and it is a fthm is false if it does not constipate angioma. fact6: If someone larks epithalamium that it does not focalise Hydnaceae and it does not sophisticate does not hold. fact7: This Pneumovax is a Swazi and does focalise Hydnaceae. fact8: This Pneumovax is a fthm if this paragon does not constipate angioma. fact9: If this Pneumovax does not constipate angioma then the fact that she/he is a Swazi and is a kind of a fthm is false. fact10: This Pneumovax does not constipate angioma if this paragon does not constipate angioma. fact11: This loincloth does not slaver virulency if the fact that it is a urethrocele and slaver virulency is wrong. fact12: If this paragon is not a fthm then this Pneumovax sophisticates. fact13: If this loincloth does not slaver virulency the fact that this buckram does protest bravado and archaizes incertitude hold. fact14: This paragon does not constipate angioma or the person does not sophisticate or both. fact15: That gnathion is not a barter and/or does not deepen Colombo. fact16: This Pneumovax is a kind of a fthm if this paragon does not sophisticate.

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

That this Pneumovax is a Swazi and it is a fthm is false.

¬({D}{c} & {C}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This paragon does sophisticate if that the fact that Clint does not focalise Hydnaceae and the person does not sophisticate is right does not hold. fact2: The fact that this Pneumovax focalises Hydnaceae is right. fact3: The fact that this loincloth is a urethrocele and it slavers virulency does not hold. fact4: This Pneumovax does not focalise Hydnaceae or it is not a kind of a dysgraphia or both. fact5: That somebody is a Swazi and it is a fthm is false if it does not constipate angioma. fact6: If someone larks epithalamium that it does not focalise Hydnaceae and it does not sophisticate does not hold. fact7: This Pneumovax is a Swazi and does focalise Hydnaceae. fact8: This Pneumovax is a fthm if this paragon does not constipate angioma. fact9: If this Pneumovax does not constipate angioma then the fact that she/he is a Swazi and is a kind of a fthm is false. fact10: This Pneumovax does not constipate angioma if this paragon does not constipate angioma. fact11: This loincloth does not slaver virulency if the fact that it is a urethrocele and slaver virulency is wrong. fact12: If this paragon is not a fthm then this Pneumovax sophisticates. fact13: If this loincloth does not slaver virulency the fact that this buckram does protest bravado and archaizes incertitude hold. fact14: This paragon does not constipate angioma or the person does not sophisticate or both. fact15: That gnathion is not a barter and/or does not deepen Colombo. fact16: This Pneumovax is a kind of a fthm if this paragon does not sophisticate. ; $hypothesis$ = That this Pneumovax is a Swazi and it is a fthm is false. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact8 & fact16 -> int1: This Pneumovax is a kind of a fthm.; fact7 -> int2: This Pneumovax is a Swazi.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That watcher is not a synthetic and excavates Albers.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: If that watcher does not excavate Albers it is a Lucanidae. fact2: Somebody that is not spectrometric is not a Lucanidae and does agglomerate narcism. fact3: The fact that that crypt is a kind of non-spectrometric a Cichorium is wrong. fact4: That that watcher is a kind of a Lucanidae hold if the fact that that person is not a synthetic and excavates Albers is wrong. fact5: That that watcher is not a kind of a Lucanidae is true if that that crypt is both not spectrometric and a Cichorium does not hold. fact6: If that crypt is spectrometric then the fact that that watcher is not a synthetic and excavates Albers does not hold. fact7: That that crypt is spectrometric and it is a Cichorium is wrong.

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

The mammal is not a kind of a Lucanidae but it does agglomerate narcism.

(¬{B}{cm} & {DJ}{cm})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that watcher does not excavate Albers it is a Lucanidae. fact2: Somebody that is not spectrometric is not a Lucanidae and does agglomerate narcism. fact3: The fact that that crypt is a kind of non-spectrometric a Cichorium is wrong. fact4: That that watcher is a kind of a Lucanidae hold if the fact that that person is not a synthetic and excavates Albers is wrong. fact5: That that watcher is not a kind of a Lucanidae is true if that that crypt is both not spectrometric and a Cichorium does not hold. fact6: If that crypt is spectrometric then the fact that that watcher is not a synthetic and excavates Albers does not hold. fact7: That that crypt is spectrometric and it is a Cichorium is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That watcher is not a synthetic and excavates Albers. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that watcher is not a synthetic and excavates Albers is not right.; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: That watcher is a kind of a Lucanidae.; fact5 & fact3 -> int2: That watcher is not a kind of a Lucanidae.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this addictiveness occurs and that teamwork occurs does not hold.

¬({C} & {D})

fact1: That that relaxing does not happens and this atheroscleroticness does not happens is false. fact2: That that cyclicalness happens is brought about by that that nominalisticness occurs. fact3: If the homochromaticness occurs that cyclicalness happens. fact4: If the fact that this teeth does not occurs is not incorrect then that that relaxing does not occurs and that statuary does not occurs is not true. fact5: The lusting mythology happens. fact6: If the uneatableness occurs then the xenogenesis happens. fact7: The fact that that barring Bernini happens hold. fact8: Both the accordantness and the genericness occurs. fact9: If that that relaxing does not happens and that statuary does not happens does not hold then this atheroscleroticness does not happens. fact10: The achromaticness occurs. fact11: That this breaching revolting happens prevents that this addictiveness does not occurs. fact12: The devitalisation occurs. fact13: If the takeoff happens the sleepwalking occurs. fact14: Both that nominalisticness and this breaching revolting occurs. fact15: The fact that that bemocking thinking does not occurs and the decrepitating does not happens is incorrect. fact16: The towelling cohesiveness occurs. fact17: The fact that this localization occurs is correct. fact18: This antenuptialness occurs. fact19: Both the circumscription and that cyclicalness happens. fact20: That this hurdle does not happens is prevented by that the swashing occurs. fact21: This broiling happens. fact22: If this atheroscleroticness occurs that that teamwork happens hold.

fact1: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact2: {A} -> {IL} fact3: {JG} -> {IL} fact4: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) fact5: {IS} fact6: {JK} -> {FS} fact7: {CJ} fact8: ({IB} & {DC}) fact9: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact10: {GR} fact11: {B} -> {C} fact12: {II} fact13: {HQ} -> {DD} fact14: ({A} & {B}) fact15: ¬(¬{HJ} & ¬{P}) fact16: {O} fact17: {EC} fact18: {BH} fact19: ({JA} & {IL}) fact20: {GD} -> {AP} fact21: {L} fact22: {E} -> {D}

That cyclicalness occurs.

{IL}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that relaxing does not happens and this atheroscleroticness does not happens is false. fact2: That that cyclicalness happens is brought about by that that nominalisticness occurs. fact3: If the homochromaticness occurs that cyclicalness happens. fact4: If the fact that this teeth does not occurs is not incorrect then that that relaxing does not occurs and that statuary does not occurs is not true. fact5: The lusting mythology happens. fact6: If the uneatableness occurs then the xenogenesis happens. fact7: The fact that that barring Bernini happens hold. fact8: Both the accordantness and the genericness occurs. fact9: If that that relaxing does not happens and that statuary does not happens does not hold then this atheroscleroticness does not happens. fact10: The achromaticness occurs. fact11: That this breaching revolting happens prevents that this addictiveness does not occurs. fact12: The devitalisation occurs. fact13: If the takeoff happens the sleepwalking occurs. fact14: Both that nominalisticness and this breaching revolting occurs. fact15: The fact that that bemocking thinking does not occurs and the decrepitating does not happens is incorrect. fact16: The towelling cohesiveness occurs. fact17: The fact that this localization occurs is correct. fact18: This antenuptialness occurs. fact19: Both the circumscription and that cyclicalness happens. fact20: That this hurdle does not happens is prevented by that the swashing occurs. fact21: This broiling happens. fact22: If this atheroscleroticness occurs that that teamwork happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this addictiveness occurs and that teamwork occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that chimneysweep is not a Doha but that thing is expansive does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: The fact that this BASIC is not a Gauri hold. fact2: If this BASIC is not a Gauri then that it is not a leu is correct. fact3: This BASIC is a Doha. fact4: If that chimneysweep is not a Gauri this BASIC is a Doha. fact5: The fact that this philanderer is not expansive is right if that chimneysweep is not a Doha but it is a Vanir. fact6: That chimneysweep is not an age. fact7: That chimneysweep is both expansive and not a Ficus if it is not an age. fact8: If this anorthite is a Antananarivo and not an aesthetic then this philanderer does not countenance ticket. fact9: That some person is not sensorimotor and seats is not correct if that person does not countenance ticket. fact10: That this philanderer is a kind of a Vanir is correct. fact11: That chimneysweep does not hoop eleventh. fact12: The fact that that chimneysweep is a Doha is false if this philanderer does not hoop eleventh and is a Vanir. fact13: If this BASIC is not an age then that chimneysweep is a Gauri that is a Ficus. fact14: If that this philanderer is not sensorimotor but it seats is false this BASIC is not an age. fact15: The fact that something is not a Doha and is not unexpansive is wrong if it is a Gauri. fact16: The stratum does not hoop eleventh. fact17: This philanderer does not hoop eleventh but it is a kind of a Vanir if this BASIC is not a Gauri. fact18: This philanderer is an age. fact19: That chimneysweep swaps SbE.

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

The fact that that chimneysweep is not a Doha but that thing is expansive does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this BASIC is not a Gauri hold. fact2: If this BASIC is not a Gauri then that it is not a leu is correct. fact3: This BASIC is a Doha. fact4: If that chimneysweep is not a Gauri this BASIC is a Doha. fact5: The fact that this philanderer is not expansive is right if that chimneysweep is not a Doha but it is a Vanir. fact6: That chimneysweep is not an age. fact7: That chimneysweep is both expansive and not a Ficus if it is not an age. fact8: If this anorthite is a Antananarivo and not an aesthetic then this philanderer does not countenance ticket. fact9: That some person is not sensorimotor and seats is not correct if that person does not countenance ticket. fact10: That this philanderer is a kind of a Vanir is correct. fact11: That chimneysweep does not hoop eleventh. fact12: The fact that that chimneysweep is a Doha is false if this philanderer does not hoop eleventh and is a Vanir. fact13: If this BASIC is not an age then that chimneysweep is a Gauri that is a Ficus. fact14: If that this philanderer is not sensorimotor but it seats is false this BASIC is not an age. fact15: The fact that something is not a Doha and is not unexpansive is wrong if it is a Gauri. fact16: The stratum does not hoop eleventh. fact17: This philanderer does not hoop eleventh but it is a kind of a Vanir if this BASIC is not a Gauri. fact18: This philanderer is an age. fact19: That chimneysweep swaps SbE. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that chimneysweep is not a Doha but that thing is expansive does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact1 -> int1: This philanderer does not hoop eleventh but it is a Vanir.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That chimneysweep is not a kind of a Doha.; fact7 & fact6 -> int3: That chimneysweep is expansive and not a Ficus.; int3 -> int4: That chimneysweep is expansive.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That concessioner is a prime.

{D}{c}

fact1: The fact that somebody is a kind of a craftsmanship that is not a kind of a prime does not hold if it is a scapular. fact2: If the fact that something does not kindle Epimetheus but this is irreversible does not hold then this is not irreversible. fact3: Something is not a craftsmanship and is not a phyle if it is not irreversible. fact4: That someone is irreversible hold if it is a phyle. fact5: This Oscan is a phyle. fact6: The clinid is a craftsmanship. fact7: That concessioner is irreversible if this quoit is a kind of a craftsmanship. fact8: Something is a prime if it is irreversible. fact9: That this quoit does not kindle Epimetheus and is irreversible does not hold if this quoit is a kind of a scapular. fact10: This quoit is a scapular if it does kindle Epimetheus. fact11: That concessioner is not a prime if this Oscan is not a prime.

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

That concessioner is not a prime.

¬{D}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that somebody is a kind of a craftsmanship that is not a kind of a prime does not hold if it is a scapular. fact2: If the fact that something does not kindle Epimetheus but this is irreversible does not hold then this is not irreversible. fact3: Something is not a craftsmanship and is not a phyle if it is not irreversible. fact4: That someone is irreversible hold if it is a phyle. fact5: This Oscan is a phyle. fact6: The clinid is a craftsmanship. fact7: That concessioner is irreversible if this quoit is a kind of a craftsmanship. fact8: Something is a prime if it is irreversible. fact9: That this quoit does not kindle Epimetheus and is irreversible does not hold if this quoit is a kind of a scapular. fact10: This quoit is a scapular if it does kindle Epimetheus. fact11: That concessioner is not a prime if this Oscan is not a prime. ; $hypothesis$ = That concessioner is a prime. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that troche refreshes acarophobia and it defaults peeled hold.

({B}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: Something does not hybridize if that it is coccygeal and is a mysophilia does not hold. fact2: That troche defaults peeled if that troche is intrinsical. fact3: The fact that that globalisation does not hybridize hold if the fact that this ornithine does not hybridize and is not coccygeal is wrong. fact4: Some man is not intrinsical if that the person is intrinsical and is not a kind of a hypoadrenalism is not correct. fact5: That something is both intrinsical and not a hypoadrenalism is wrong if that is a Dictyophera. fact6: If this duchy is not a Ostreidae and is intrinsical that troche is not intrinsical. fact7: This bassist refreshes acarophobia if this duchy refreshes acarophobia. fact8: If that troche is non-intrinsical then that this duchy does not refresh acarophobia and is not a Ostreidae is not right. fact9: Something is a hypoadrenalism if it is heartless. fact10: If someone is a Dictyophera the person is not a kind of a Ostreidae and the person is intrinsical. fact11: That troche refreshes acarophobia if this duchy is a varix but it does not multiply vehemence. fact12: That troche defaults peeled if that troche is a kind of a Ostreidae. fact13: That troche is a Dictyophera and this person is heartless if that globalisation does not hybridize. fact14: This duchy is a kind of a Ostreidae. fact15: This Calapuya does not refresh acarophobia and is not a stuffed. fact16: That troche is a kind of a Ostreidae or is intrinsical or both. fact17: This duchy is not a varix and does not multiply vehemence. fact18: The fact that something does refresh acarophobia and defaults peeled does not hold if it is not intrinsical. fact19: That pademelon does multiply vehemence if it depletes Langside. fact20: If that that some person does not refresh acarophobia and the one is not a Ostreidae is not wrong is wrong the one refresh acarophobia. fact21: This duchy is not softhearted if that globalisation does not hybridize. fact22: This duchy is not a varix. fact23: If some man is a hypoadrenalism the fact that it is a Dictyophera is right.

fact1: (x): ¬({I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{H}x fact2: {C}{b} -> {A}{b} fact3: ¬(¬{H}{d} & ¬{I}{d}) -> ¬{H}{c} fact4: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{C}x fact5: (x): {E}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{F}x) fact6: (¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact7: {B}{a} -> {B}{bk} fact8: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact9: (x): {G}x -> {F}x fact10: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) fact11: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact12: {D}{b} -> {A}{b} fact13: ¬{H}{c} -> ({E}{b} & {G}{b}) fact14: {D}{a} fact15: (¬{B}{bf} & ¬{FQ}{bf}) fact16: ({D}{b} v {C}{b}) fact17: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact18: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) fact19: {BI}{gr} -> {AB}{gr} fact20: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}x fact21: ¬{H}{c} -> {G}{a} fact22: ¬{AA}{a} fact23: (x): {F}x -> {E}x

This bassist does not default peeled and does not clank apophasis.

(¬{A}{bk} & ¬{HA}{bk})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something does not hybridize if that it is coccygeal and is a mysophilia does not hold. fact2: That troche defaults peeled if that troche is intrinsical. fact3: The fact that that globalisation does not hybridize hold if the fact that this ornithine does not hybridize and is not coccygeal is wrong. fact4: Some man is not intrinsical if that the person is intrinsical and is not a kind of a hypoadrenalism is not correct. fact5: That something is both intrinsical and not a hypoadrenalism is wrong if that is a Dictyophera. fact6: If this duchy is not a Ostreidae and is intrinsical that troche is not intrinsical. fact7: This bassist refreshes acarophobia if this duchy refreshes acarophobia. fact8: If that troche is non-intrinsical then that this duchy does not refresh acarophobia and is not a Ostreidae is not right. fact9: Something is a hypoadrenalism if it is heartless. fact10: If someone is a Dictyophera the person is not a kind of a Ostreidae and the person is intrinsical. fact11: That troche refreshes acarophobia if this duchy is a varix but it does not multiply vehemence. fact12: That troche defaults peeled if that troche is a kind of a Ostreidae. fact13: That troche is a Dictyophera and this person is heartless if that globalisation does not hybridize. fact14: This duchy is a kind of a Ostreidae. fact15: This Calapuya does not refresh acarophobia and is not a stuffed. fact16: That troche is a kind of a Ostreidae or is intrinsical or both. fact17: This duchy is not a varix and does not multiply vehemence. fact18: The fact that something does refresh acarophobia and defaults peeled does not hold if it is not intrinsical. fact19: That pademelon does multiply vehemence if it depletes Langside. fact20: If that that some person does not refresh acarophobia and the one is not a Ostreidae is not wrong is wrong the one refresh acarophobia. fact21: This duchy is not softhearted if that globalisation does not hybridize. fact22: This duchy is not a varix. fact23: If some man is a hypoadrenalism the fact that it is a Dictyophera is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That that troche refreshes acarophobia and it defaults peeled hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This fluoroscope pontificates.

{A}{a}

fact1: The fact that this eupnoea is not a congruity and does not pontificate is not true if this fluoroscope is a thermal. fact2: That berserker pontificates. fact3: If the fact that some person is not a congruity and it does not pontificate is incorrect then it pontificate. fact4: This fluoroscope pontificates.

fact1: {C}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{db} & ¬{A}{db}) fact2: {A}{ao} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x fact4: {A}{a}

This eupnoea pontificates.

{A}{db}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this eupnoea is not a congruity and does not pontificate is not true if this fluoroscope is a thermal. fact2: That berserker pontificates. fact3: If the fact that some person is not a congruity and it does not pontificate is incorrect then it pontificate. fact4: This fluoroscope pontificates. ; $hypothesis$ = This fluoroscope pontificates. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this moujik is a kind of a bungling.

{A}{a}

fact1: That some person is not a Myaceae and is czaristic is true if it is unbeneficed. fact2: This moujik is not polychromatic. fact3: If this moujik is a Myaceae but it is not polychromatic this moujik is not a Melolonthidae. fact4: If that autoplasty is finer this tux is a braided. fact5: Michel is floral if this invitation is not a rattled or not floral or both. fact6: A shift is not a rattled or is not floral or both. fact7: If something does not cuddle Capone or this is not a kind of a heliograph or both then this is not a heliograph. fact8: That that Austronesian does not smell hepatomegaly and flushes hemidemisemiquaver is incorrect if that cancerweed is not a heliograph. fact9: That autoplasty is finer or this person is a kind of a braided or both if that Austronesian does not flush hemidemisemiquaver. fact10: If the fact that this moujik is a bungling is not incorrect then this moujik is a Melolonthidae. fact11: The fact that the jument is polychromatic is correct if this moujik is a bungling. fact12: Someone does not flush hemidemisemiquaver if the fact that the one does not smell hepatomegaly and flush hemidemisemiquaver is wrong. fact13: This moujik is a bungling or it is a kind of a Melolonthidae or both if this lovemaking is not a Myaceae. fact14: This lovemaking is not a Myaceae if this tux is not a Myaceae but this person is czaristic. fact15: Something does not cuddle Capone or it is not a heliograph or both if it is bitumenoid. fact16: Somebody is unbeneficed if that this one is unsusceptible and this one is an irresponsibility is false. fact17: If this moujik is a Myaceae and not non-polychromatic then it is not a kind of a Melolonthidae. fact18: This invitation is a shift and a SSPE. fact19: Something is bitumenoid if it is floral. fact20: That cancerweed is not a heliograph if Michel is not a heliograph. fact21: If this moujik is a kind of a Melolonthidae then the jument is polychromatic. fact22: If something is a braided the fact that this is not susceptible but an irresponsibility does not hold.

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

The jument is polychromatic.

{C}{aj}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That some person is not a Myaceae and is czaristic is true if it is unbeneficed. fact2: This moujik is not polychromatic. fact3: If this moujik is a Myaceae but it is not polychromatic this moujik is not a Melolonthidae. fact4: If that autoplasty is finer this tux is a braided. fact5: Michel is floral if this invitation is not a rattled or not floral or both. fact6: A shift is not a rattled or is not floral or both. fact7: If something does not cuddle Capone or this is not a kind of a heliograph or both then this is not a heliograph. fact8: That that Austronesian does not smell hepatomegaly and flushes hemidemisemiquaver is incorrect if that cancerweed is not a heliograph. fact9: That autoplasty is finer or this person is a kind of a braided or both if that Austronesian does not flush hemidemisemiquaver. fact10: If the fact that this moujik is a bungling is not incorrect then this moujik is a Melolonthidae. fact11: The fact that the jument is polychromatic is correct if this moujik is a bungling. fact12: Someone does not flush hemidemisemiquaver if the fact that the one does not smell hepatomegaly and flush hemidemisemiquaver is wrong. fact13: This moujik is a bungling or it is a kind of a Melolonthidae or both if this lovemaking is not a Myaceae. fact14: This lovemaking is not a Myaceae if this tux is not a Myaceae but this person is czaristic. fact15: Something does not cuddle Capone or it is not a heliograph or both if it is bitumenoid. fact16: Somebody is unbeneficed if that this one is unsusceptible and this one is an irresponsibility is false. fact17: If this moujik is a Myaceae and not non-polychromatic then it is not a kind of a Melolonthidae. fact18: This invitation is a shift and a SSPE. fact19: Something is bitumenoid if it is floral. fact20: That cancerweed is not a heliograph if Michel is not a heliograph. fact21: If this moujik is a kind of a Melolonthidae then the jument is polychromatic. fact22: If something is a braided the fact that this is not susceptible but an irresponsibility does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this moujik is a kind of a bungling. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This framing is not a kind of a rancour and/or is a Angara.

(¬{A}{c} v {D}{c})

fact1: The fact that this framing is not a kind of a rancour and/or he is a Angara does not hold if this sendee is a rancour. fact2: That ampulla is a promising if that thing is a kind of a rancour. fact3: That that ampulla is a kind of non-Masonic one that colonises fouled is false. fact4: If that that ampulla is not Masonic and does colonise fouled is not correct then it is a promising. fact5: This sendee is a kind of a rancour if that ampulla is a promising.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this framing is not a kind of a rancour and/or he is a Angara does not hold if this sendee is a rancour. fact2: That ampulla is a promising if that thing is a kind of a rancour. fact3: That that ampulla is a kind of non-Masonic one that colonises fouled is false. fact4: If that that ampulla is not Masonic and does colonise fouled is not correct then it is a promising. fact5: This sendee is a kind of a rancour if that ampulla is a promising. ; $hypothesis$ = This framing is not a kind of a rancour and/or is a Angara. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 -> int1: That that ampulla is a promising hold.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This sendee is a rancour.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That misdealing happens.

{B}

fact1: That misdealing does not occurs if the fact that both that talk and the aggrandizement happens does not hold. fact2: The fact that both this pommelling Liliopsida and this sunburst occurs is incorrect if that sprouting microbrachia does not happens. fact3: That that employing does not happens leads to that that misdealing and that frontalness happens. fact4: The fact that if that both this pommelling Liliopsida and this sunburst occurs does not hold then the fact that this sunburst does not occurs is correct hold. fact5: If that misdealing occurs then this wedding tried does not occurs and this keylessness does not occurs. fact6: The fact that both that talk and the aggrandizement occurs is false. fact7: That this sunburst does not occurs prevents that employing. fact8: Both that misdealing and this keylessness occurs if that frontalness does not happens. fact9: If this sunburst does not occurs that frontalness does not occurs and that employing does not occurs.

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

That misdealing happens.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That misdealing does not occurs if the fact that both that talk and the aggrandizement happens does not hold. fact2: The fact that both this pommelling Liliopsida and this sunburst occurs is incorrect if that sprouting microbrachia does not happens. fact3: That that employing does not happens leads to that that misdealing and that frontalness happens. fact4: The fact that if that both this pommelling Liliopsida and this sunburst occurs does not hold then the fact that this sunburst does not occurs is correct hold. fact5: If that misdealing occurs then this wedding tried does not occurs and this keylessness does not occurs. fact6: The fact that both that talk and the aggrandizement occurs is false. fact7: That this sunburst does not occurs prevents that employing. fact8: Both that misdealing and this keylessness occurs if that frontalness does not happens. fact9: If this sunburst does not occurs that frontalness does not occurs and that employing does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That misdealing happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that pall is a kind of a arsenical that mugs Phillyrea is incorrect.

¬({D}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: That pall is a poignancy. fact2: Either this methicillin apotheosises Teach or the one is a mammalian or both. fact3: That pall is a mammalian and it is resident. fact4: That pall is hierarchic. fact5: That pall is a arsenical if this methicillin is resident. fact6: If this methicillin apotheosises Teach that pall mugs Phillyrea. fact7: If that this methicillin is a mammalian hold then that pall mugs Phillyrea. fact8: This methicillin is a remand and he/she readies. fact9: That somebody is a kind of a arsenical that mugs Phillyrea does not hold if she/he does not apotheosise Teach. fact10: That pall apotheosises Teach. fact11: That pall is a arsenical and not nonresident. fact12: If this methicillin is a arsenical that pall mugs Phillyrea. fact13: That pall is resident and that apotheosises Teach. fact14: The pitchblende is a arsenical.

fact1: {HD}{c} fact2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact3: ({B}{c} & {E}{c}) fact4: {IM}{c} fact5: {E}{a} -> {D}{c} fact6: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact7: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact8: ({J}{a} & {CA}{a}) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) fact10: {A}{c} fact11: ({D}{c} & {E}{c}) fact12: {D}{a} -> {C}{c} fact13: ({E}{c} & {A}{c}) fact14: {D}{fp}

The fact that that pall is a kind of a arsenical that mugs Phillyrea is incorrect.

¬({D}{c} & {C}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pall is a poignancy. fact2: Either this methicillin apotheosises Teach or the one is a mammalian or both. fact3: That pall is a mammalian and it is resident. fact4: That pall is hierarchic. fact5: That pall is a arsenical if this methicillin is resident. fact6: If this methicillin apotheosises Teach that pall mugs Phillyrea. fact7: If that this methicillin is a mammalian hold then that pall mugs Phillyrea. fact8: This methicillin is a remand and he/she readies. fact9: That somebody is a kind of a arsenical that mugs Phillyrea does not hold if she/he does not apotheosise Teach. fact10: That pall apotheosises Teach. fact11: That pall is a arsenical and not nonresident. fact12: If this methicillin is a arsenical that pall mugs Phillyrea. fact13: That pall is resident and that apotheosises Teach. fact14: The pitchblende is a arsenical. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that pall is a kind of a arsenical that mugs Phillyrea is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact6 & fact7 -> int1: That pall mugs Phillyrea.; fact11 -> int2: That pall is a kind of a arsenical.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this clouding shackled does not happens but that MMPI happens does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {E})

fact1: This shuddering happens. fact2: That that fagoting mediacy occurs is prevented by that that postdiluvian does not happens and this interpolation does not occurs. fact3: If this interpolation does not happens that fagoting mediacy does not occurs and this clouding shackled does not happens. fact4: That the Salvadoreanness happens and the holophyticness occurs is true. fact5: Notthe quaver but that cytogeneticalness happens. fact6: This clouding shackled is prevented by that both that cover and that fagoting mediacy happens. fact7: If the fact that that fratricide does not occurs is correct that postdiluvian and that aphakic happens. fact8: If that this shuddering happens and that fratricide occurs is incorrect that fratricide does not occurs. fact9: The vexing Ephemeroptera does not occurs if the fact that the vexing Ephemeroptera occurs and that cover occurs is incorrect. fact10: If this shooting oedema does not happens then this shooting oedema does not occurs but that sandbagging sundown happens. fact11: If that fagoting mediacy does not happens that the vexing Ephemeroptera occurs and that cover occurs is false. fact12: That cover happens. fact13: If that cover does not occurs that this clouding shackled does not occurs but that MMPI occurs is incorrect. fact14: This clouding shackled does not happens but that MMPI occurs if the fact that this clouding shackled does not occurs is correct. fact15: Notthe enculturation but this pronation happens. fact16: Notthe suppurating but the aggregation occurs. fact17: The unreportableness occurs. fact18: That sandbagging sundown does not happens and this ateleioticness happens. fact19: The paramagnetism occurs. fact20: If the fact that that postdiluvian occurs is not wrong notthis interpolation but that MMPI occurs.

fact1: {J} fact2: (¬{F} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact3: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact4: ({EU} & {ER}) fact5: (¬{FH} & {GE}) fact6: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact7: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact8: ¬({J} & {H}) -> ¬{H} fact9: ¬({FI} & {A}) -> ¬{FI} fact10: ¬{GH} -> (¬{GH} & {IA}) fact11: ¬{B} -> ¬({FI} & {A}) fact12: {A} fact13: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {E}) fact14: ¬{C} -> (¬{C} & {E}) fact15: (¬{CE} & {FN}) fact16: (¬{IG} & {CM}) fact17: {II} fact18: (¬{IA} & {BG}) fact19: {AQ} fact20: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E})

The fact that this clouding shackled does not happens but that MMPI happens does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {E})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This shuddering happens. fact2: That that fagoting mediacy occurs is prevented by that that postdiluvian does not happens and this interpolation does not occurs. fact3: If this interpolation does not happens that fagoting mediacy does not occurs and this clouding shackled does not happens. fact4: That the Salvadoreanness happens and the holophyticness occurs is true. fact5: Notthe quaver but that cytogeneticalness happens. fact6: This clouding shackled is prevented by that both that cover and that fagoting mediacy happens. fact7: If the fact that that fratricide does not occurs is correct that postdiluvian and that aphakic happens. fact8: If that this shuddering happens and that fratricide occurs is incorrect that fratricide does not occurs. fact9: The vexing Ephemeroptera does not occurs if the fact that the vexing Ephemeroptera occurs and that cover occurs is incorrect. fact10: If this shooting oedema does not happens then this shooting oedema does not occurs but that sandbagging sundown happens. fact11: If that fagoting mediacy does not happens that the vexing Ephemeroptera occurs and that cover occurs is false. fact12: That cover happens. fact13: If that cover does not occurs that this clouding shackled does not occurs but that MMPI occurs is incorrect. fact14: This clouding shackled does not happens but that MMPI occurs if the fact that this clouding shackled does not occurs is correct. fact15: Notthe enculturation but this pronation happens. fact16: Notthe suppurating but the aggregation occurs. fact17: The unreportableness occurs. fact18: That sandbagging sundown does not happens and this ateleioticness happens. fact19: The paramagnetism occurs. fact20: If the fact that that postdiluvian occurs is not wrong notthis interpolation but that MMPI occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this clouding shackled does not happens but that MMPI happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This shanghaier does not tank eroticism.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: This apricot is blastemic. fact2: That solitaire is a mismatch. fact3: If that solitaire is a kind of a mismatch that solitaire is blastemic.

fact1: {B}{bk} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This apricot is blastemic. fact2: That solitaire is a mismatch. fact3: If that solitaire is a kind of a mismatch that solitaire is blastemic. ; $hypothesis$ = This shanghaier does not tank eroticism. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That weevil does not democratise hypoplasia.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: If somebody destabilises then it democratises hypoplasia. fact2: That weevil does democratise hypoplasia if that weevil deregulates glory. fact3: the glory deregulates weevil. fact4: If that tapenade deregulates glory then that tapenade is East. fact5: That weevil deregulates glory.

fact1: (x): {GT}x -> {B}x fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact3: {AA}{aa} fact4: {A}{h} -> {AN}{h} fact5: {A}{a}

The fact that the peckerwood democratises hypoplasia is not incorrect if this one destabilises.

{GT}{hr} -> {B}{hr}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody destabilises then it democratises hypoplasia. fact2: That weevil does democratise hypoplasia if that weevil deregulates glory. fact3: the glory deregulates weevil. fact4: If that tapenade deregulates glory then that tapenade is East. fact5: That weevil deregulates glory. ; $hypothesis$ = That weevil does not democratise hypoplasia. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that rebutter is barographic hold.

{B}{a}

fact1: If this fetichism does not luff Kadikoy but it is a venturesomeness that rebutter is not barographic. fact2: That if something is barographic then it does luff Kadikoy is right. fact3: This fetichism is cenobitic and is a kind of a Psophia. fact4: Sydney is a team and it is barographic. fact5: If something is cenobitic then the fact that it is not anencephalic and it is a kind of a glare is not true. fact6: If the fact that something is both not anencephalic and a glare does not hold it does not luff Kadikoy. fact7: That rebutter blockades Anagasta. fact8: That rebutter luffs Kadikoy.

fact1: (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact3: ({F}{b} & {I}{b}) fact4: ({IK}{hj} & {B}{hj}) fact5: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x fact7: {CP}{a} fact8: {A}{a}

That rebutter is non-barographic.

¬{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this fetichism does not luff Kadikoy but it is a venturesomeness that rebutter is not barographic. fact2: That if something is barographic then it does luff Kadikoy is right. fact3: This fetichism is cenobitic and is a kind of a Psophia. fact4: Sydney is a team and it is barographic. fact5: If something is cenobitic then the fact that it is not anencephalic and it is a kind of a glare is not true. fact6: If the fact that something is both not anencephalic and a glare does not hold it does not luff Kadikoy. fact7: That rebutter blockades Anagasta. fact8: That rebutter luffs Kadikoy. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that rebutter is barographic hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This bolide occurs and that yachtinging does not happens.

({A} & ¬{B})

fact1: That both this non-protozoologicalness and this bolide occurs is triggered by that yachtinging. fact2: If that inheritableness does not occurs the fact that this bolide but notthat yachtinging occurs does not hold. fact3: The anodalness occurs. fact4: That yachtinging does not occurs. fact5: That that yachtinging and that inheritableness happens is brought about by that that assistance does not occurs. fact6: This bolide occurs.

fact1: {B} -> (¬{AM} & {A}) fact2: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) fact3: {GJ} fact4: ¬{B} fact5: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) fact6: {A}

That that protozoologicalness does not happens hold.

¬{AM}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both this non-protozoologicalness and this bolide occurs is triggered by that yachtinging. fact2: If that inheritableness does not occurs the fact that this bolide but notthat yachtinging occurs does not hold. fact3: The anodalness occurs. fact4: That yachtinging does not occurs. fact5: That that yachtinging and that inheritableness happens is brought about by that that assistance does not occurs. fact6: This bolide occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This bolide occurs and that yachtinging does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This lechery is thirsty and it juts Selcraig.

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

fact1: The fact that this lechery does not reiterate and is not a kind of a plagiocephaly does not hold. fact2: That that something is nonadsorbent but it is not unpowered is right does not hold if it is a tetrad. fact3: If this lechery is not a leach but an il that this lechery is thirsty is correct. fact4: The fact that some man does not reiterate and is not a plagiocephaly if it embellishes Pengo is right. fact5: If that somebody is a kind of nonadsorbent one that is not unpowered does not hold then the fact that it embellishes Pengo hold. fact6: This lechery is not a leach but that thing is an il. fact7: The fact that this lechery does jut Selcraig is right if the fact that the fact that it does not reiterate and it is not a plagiocephaly is right is wrong. fact8: That this lechery is not non-thirsty and he/she does jut Selcraig does not hold if this tragedienne does not reiterate.

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

The fact that this lechery is thirsty and this person juts Selcraig is not correct.

¬({B}{a} & {A}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this lechery does not reiterate and is not a kind of a plagiocephaly does not hold. fact2: That that something is nonadsorbent but it is not unpowered is right does not hold if it is a tetrad. fact3: If this lechery is not a leach but an il that this lechery is thirsty is correct. fact4: The fact that some man does not reiterate and is not a plagiocephaly if it embellishes Pengo is right. fact5: If that somebody is a kind of nonadsorbent one that is not unpowered does not hold then the fact that it embellishes Pengo hold. fact6: This lechery is not a leach but that thing is an il. fact7: The fact that this lechery does jut Selcraig is right if the fact that the fact that it does not reiterate and it is not a plagiocephaly is right is wrong. fact8: That this lechery is not non-thirsty and he/she does jut Selcraig does not hold if this tragedienne does not reiterate. ; $hypothesis$ = This lechery is thirsty and it juts Selcraig. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact6 -> int1: This lechery is thirsty.; fact7 & fact1 -> int2: This lechery juts Selcraig.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is some man such that it sudates Albulidae and is not a kind of a fresher is wrong.

¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: If this buckleya is not untranslatable it does appertain and it readies. fact2: Some man is a dogma and is not imprecise. fact3: There is something such that it is a Dendranthema. fact4: Something is not forcipate if it appertains. fact5: There is someone such that he/she is not a Plasmodiophora. fact6: Something sudates Albulidae and is a fresher. fact7: Something does thicken Binet and does not insulate Cydippidea. fact8: There exists something such that it crabs admonishment. fact9: Something is a Sudan but this thing is not a Teach. fact10: There is somebody such that he/she sudates Albulidae and he/she is not a kind of a fresher. fact11: Everything is a ghostliness that is not benignant. fact12: Someone is cyanobacterial but not a Vigna.

fact1: ¬{D}{a} -> ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact2: (Ex): ({IC}x & ¬{IN}x) fact3: (Ex): {EK}x fact4: (x): {A}x -> ¬{EJ}x fact5: (Ex): ¬{JG}x fact6: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: (Ex): ({FP}x & ¬{EU}x) fact8: (Ex): {J}x fact9: (Ex): ({BK}x & ¬{BJ}x) fact10: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact11: (x): ({AM}x & ¬{B}x) fact12: (Ex): ({CD}x & ¬{DQ}x)

There is some person such that it is a ghostliness and is not forcipate.

(Ex): ({AM}x & ¬{EJ}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this buckleya is not untranslatable it does appertain and it readies. fact2: Some man is a dogma and is not imprecise. fact3: There is something such that it is a Dendranthema. fact4: Something is not forcipate if it appertains. fact5: There is someone such that he/she is not a Plasmodiophora. fact6: Something sudates Albulidae and is a fresher. fact7: Something does thicken Binet and does not insulate Cydippidea. fact8: There exists something such that it crabs admonishment. fact9: Something is a Sudan but this thing is not a Teach. fact10: There is somebody such that he/she sudates Albulidae and he/she is not a kind of a fresher. fact11: Everything is a ghostliness that is not benignant. fact12: Someone is cyanobacterial but not a Vigna. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is some man such that it sudates Albulidae and is not a kind of a fresher is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That bestiality is supervisory.

{B}{c}

fact1: If someone is not intertribal the person is a kind of a launching and the person is antithyroid. fact2: Something is not antithyroid and is not a kind of a launching if that thing is not supervisory. fact3: That bestiality is non-supervisory if something does not paltering jibe. fact4: If this kummel is not supervisory then the fact that that bestiality palterings jibe and is a launching does not hold. fact5: If there exists somebody such that that he/she plumbs credibleness and does paltering jibe is incorrect that bestiality is not supervisory. fact6: That bestiality is a Godel. fact7: This dredge is not a launching. fact8: If some person is a kind of a launching that one is supervisory. fact9: The fact that this kummel plumbs credibleness and it palterings jibe is false if this dredge is not a launching. fact10: If a pantheist one is not intertribal the one is not supervisory. fact11: There is something such that it does plumb credibleness and it palterings jibe. fact12: Some person is not intertribal if it is a Godel and is pantheist. fact13: If there exists some person such that the fact that it plumbs credibleness and is a launching is false then this kummel is not supervisory.

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

This kink is not a launching.

¬{A}{k}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If someone is not intertribal the person is a kind of a launching and the person is antithyroid. fact2: Something is not antithyroid and is not a kind of a launching if that thing is not supervisory. fact3: That bestiality is non-supervisory if something does not paltering jibe. fact4: If this kummel is not supervisory then the fact that that bestiality palterings jibe and is a launching does not hold. fact5: If there exists somebody such that that he/she plumbs credibleness and does paltering jibe is incorrect that bestiality is not supervisory. fact6: That bestiality is a Godel. fact7: This dredge is not a launching. fact8: If some person is a kind of a launching that one is supervisory. fact9: The fact that this kummel plumbs credibleness and it palterings jibe is false if this dredge is not a launching. fact10: If a pantheist one is not intertribal the one is not supervisory. fact11: There is something such that it does plumb credibleness and it palterings jibe. fact12: Some person is not intertribal if it is a Godel and is pantheist. fact13: If there exists some person such that the fact that it plumbs credibleness and is a launching is false then this kummel is not supervisory. ; $hypothesis$ = That bestiality is supervisory. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact7 -> int1: The fact that this kummel plumbs credibleness and does paltering jibe is false.; int1 -> int2: There exists someone such that the fact that it does plumb credibleness and it palterings jibe is incorrect.; int2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Ramadan occurs.

{C}

fact1: That this Ramadan occurs is prevented by that this conglobation does not occurs. fact2: If that enfilading Zhuang occurs and that hangover occurs this conglobation does not occurs. fact3: The fact that either this clearingness or this abjuration or both occurs does not hold if this conglobation does not occurs. fact4: If this abjuration happens the nonconformity happens. fact5: This abjuration happens. fact6: This Ramadan happens if this clearingness happens. fact7: This abjuration happens and this clearingness happens. fact8: This Ramadan does not happens if the fact that this clearingness or this abjuration or both occurs is wrong.

fact1: ¬{D} -> ¬{C} fact2: ({E} & {F}) -> ¬{D} fact3: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} v {A}) fact4: {A} -> {DP} fact5: {A} fact6: {B} -> {C} fact7: ({A} & {B}) fact8: ¬({B} v {A}) -> ¬{C}

The nonconformity happens.

{DP}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this Ramadan occurs is prevented by that this conglobation does not occurs. fact2: If that enfilading Zhuang occurs and that hangover occurs this conglobation does not occurs. fact3: The fact that either this clearingness or this abjuration or both occurs does not hold if this conglobation does not occurs. fact4: If this abjuration happens the nonconformity happens. fact5: This abjuration happens. fact6: This Ramadan happens if this clearingness happens. fact7: This abjuration happens and this clearingness happens. fact8: This Ramadan does not happens if the fact that this clearingness or this abjuration or both occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This Ramadan occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: This clearingness happens.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This danish happens.

{E}

fact1: The prank does not occurs. fact2: If this aciculateness occurs then that interlinearness happens. fact3: If the normalisation happens and this visiting occurs then the checkup does not happens. fact4: This danish does not happens if that emptying happens and that interlinearness happens. fact5: If that unreasonableness happens then that interlinearness occurs. fact6: If the bookkeeping occurs then this inclination happens. fact7: That that emptying does not occurs triggers that that cornered happens and that interlinearness occurs. fact8: If that ramble occurs the electrostaticness happens. fact9: That that that outsmarting chubbiness occurs but this squandermania does not happens hold does not hold if that ramble occurs. fact10: That impermanentness occurs if the fact that that unreasonableness does not occurs and this aciculateness does not happens is false. fact11: Both this squandermania and that emptying occurs. fact12: That lobatedness occurs. fact13: That that interlinearness and the non-unreasonableness happens is caused by that that emptying does not occurs. fact14: This squandermania happens. fact15: Either this aciculateness happens or that unreasonableness happens or both.

fact1: ¬{BC} fact2: {A} -> {C} fact3: ({BI} & {J}) -> ¬{GL} fact4: ({D} & {C}) -> ¬{E} fact5: {B} -> {C} fact6: {CP} -> {EI} fact7: ¬{D} -> ({BK} & {C}) fact8: {H} -> {GJ} fact9: {H} -> ¬({G} & ¬{F}) fact10: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {EC} fact11: ({F} & {D}) fact12: {U} fact13: ¬{D} -> ({C} & ¬{B}) fact14: {F} fact15: ({A} v {B})

Both that impermanentness and that cornered happens.

({EC} & {BK})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The prank does not occurs. fact2: If this aciculateness occurs then that interlinearness happens. fact3: If the normalisation happens and this visiting occurs then the checkup does not happens. fact4: This danish does not happens if that emptying happens and that interlinearness happens. fact5: If that unreasonableness happens then that interlinearness occurs. fact6: If the bookkeeping occurs then this inclination happens. fact7: That that emptying does not occurs triggers that that cornered happens and that interlinearness occurs. fact8: If that ramble occurs the electrostaticness happens. fact9: That that that outsmarting chubbiness occurs but this squandermania does not happens hold does not hold if that ramble occurs. fact10: That impermanentness occurs if the fact that that unreasonableness does not occurs and this aciculateness does not happens is false. fact11: Both this squandermania and that emptying occurs. fact12: That lobatedness occurs. fact13: That that interlinearness and the non-unreasonableness happens is caused by that that emptying does not occurs. fact14: This squandermania happens. fact15: Either this aciculateness happens or that unreasonableness happens or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This danish happens. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact2 & fact5 -> int1: That that interlinearness occurs is correct.; fact11 -> int2: That emptying happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That emptying occurs and that interlinearness happens.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This crossways violates.

{D}{a}

fact1: This crossways does staff quirkiness. fact2: This crossways is not a kind of a HI. fact3: Some man is a Bloomsbury if that either it is not congenial or it does not riposte sponginess or both is incorrect. fact4: This crossways does not riposte sponginess if the fact that that the sweatshirt does not riposte sponginess and she is not a strum is correct is wrong. fact5: If a nibble does cap Cerapteryx then that is not lathery. fact6: That somebody does not flunk Galeorhinus and it does not manipulate Gomel is not true if it is a Lug. fact7: If that this crossways does not flunk Galeorhinus and does not manipulate Gomel is incorrect then that tovarisch does not fortify Golgotha. fact8: This crossways is congenial. fact9: If that tovarisch does not fortify Golgotha then this does violate and is a strum. fact10: This leatherwork is congenial. fact11: This crossways is a Bloomsbury. fact12: If Les does fortify Golgotha then Les does not manipulate Gomel or that is not uncongenial or both. fact13: If the fact that something ripostes sponginess and it is congenial is correct it does not violate. fact14: This warehouse is not congenial if Les does not manipulate Gomel and/or that thing is congenial. fact15: If this warehouse is not congenial then that the sweatshirt does not riposte sponginess and is not a strum does not hold.

fact1: {DM}{a} fact2: ¬{DT}{a} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x v ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact4: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact5: (x): ({IN}x & {HG}x) -> ¬{DG}x fact6: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) fact7: ¬(¬{H}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) -> ¬{F}{jh} fact8: {C}{a} fact9: ¬{F}{jh} -> ({D}{jh} & {E}{jh}) fact10: {C}{ag} fact11: {A}{a} fact12: {F}{d} -> (¬{G}{d} v {C}{d}) fact13: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact14: (¬{G}{d} v {C}{d}) -> ¬{C}{c} fact15: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

This crossways violates.

{D}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This crossways does staff quirkiness. fact2: This crossways is not a kind of a HI. fact3: Some man is a Bloomsbury if that either it is not congenial or it does not riposte sponginess or both is incorrect. fact4: This crossways does not riposte sponginess if the fact that that the sweatshirt does not riposte sponginess and she is not a strum is correct is wrong. fact5: If a nibble does cap Cerapteryx then that is not lathery. fact6: That somebody does not flunk Galeorhinus and it does not manipulate Gomel is not true if it is a Lug. fact7: If that this crossways does not flunk Galeorhinus and does not manipulate Gomel is incorrect then that tovarisch does not fortify Golgotha. fact8: This crossways is congenial. fact9: If that tovarisch does not fortify Golgotha then this does violate and is a strum. fact10: This leatherwork is congenial. fact11: This crossways is a Bloomsbury. fact12: If Les does fortify Golgotha then Les does not manipulate Gomel or that is not uncongenial or both. fact13: If the fact that something ripostes sponginess and it is congenial is correct it does not violate. fact14: This warehouse is not congenial if Les does not manipulate Gomel and/or that thing is congenial. fact15: If this warehouse is not congenial then that the sweatshirt does not riposte sponginess and is not a strum does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This crossways violates. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that midgrass is unclean is true.

{C}{b}

fact1: Something is a kind of non-unmyelinated thing that bemuses Pseudowintera if it is not bicapsular. fact2: Someone is unclean if the fact that that one is not unmyelinated does not hold. fact3: That bier is a kind of non-quantal one that pomades myometritis. fact4: This agglutinin is unclean. fact5: If that winery promises myoma that midgrass is unmyelinated. fact6: the myoma promises winery. fact7: Something is not bicapsular if it is non-quantal and it pomades myometritis.

fact1: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{B}x & {D}x) fact2: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact3: (¬{F}{in} & {G}{in}) fact4: {C}{bf} fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact6: {AA}{aa} fact7: (x): (¬{F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x

That bier is unclean.

{C}{in}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a kind of non-unmyelinated thing that bemuses Pseudowintera if it is not bicapsular. fact2: Someone is unclean if the fact that that one is not unmyelinated does not hold. fact3: That bier is a kind of non-quantal one that pomades myometritis. fact4: This agglutinin is unclean. fact5: If that winery promises myoma that midgrass is unmyelinated. fact6: the myoma promises winery. fact7: Something is not bicapsular if it is non-quantal and it pomades myometritis. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that midgrass is unclean is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This situation occurs.

{C}

fact1: The mercantileness and that splenicness happens. fact2: That bingle does not occurs. fact3: This unambitiousness does not occurs and that aspersion does not occurs if the fact that that embracing happens is right. fact4: That that aspersion does not happens causes that both that hiving parked and this Crabbing cancelled occurs. fact5: That astonishing occurs. fact6: That overturning Bahaism happens. fact7: That hiving parked does not occurs if the fact that this Crabbing cancelled and/or that aspersion happens is incorrect. fact8: That this situation happens is prevented by that both that overturning Bahaism and that astonishing happens. fact9: If that astonishing does not happens then this situation and that overturning Bahaism happens. fact10: That that astonishing does not occurs is triggered by that that hiving parked does not happens.

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

The syllabification happens.

{JH}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The mercantileness and that splenicness happens. fact2: That bingle does not occurs. fact3: This unambitiousness does not occurs and that aspersion does not occurs if the fact that that embracing happens is right. fact4: That that aspersion does not happens causes that both that hiving parked and this Crabbing cancelled occurs. fact5: That astonishing occurs. fact6: That overturning Bahaism happens. fact7: That hiving parked does not occurs if the fact that this Crabbing cancelled and/or that aspersion happens is incorrect. fact8: That this situation happens is prevented by that both that overturning Bahaism and that astonishing happens. fact9: If that astonishing does not happens then this situation and that overturning Bahaism happens. fact10: That that astonishing does not occurs is triggered by that that hiving parked does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This situation occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact5 -> int1: That overturning Bahaism occurs and that astonishing occurs.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that momma does not miffed is correct.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: If that momma does not exculpate fingerpointing then that Feosol miffeds and is a singles. fact2: This slapper is not a Bede. fact3: This slapper is not statesmanlike and/or this person does not hightail hunched. fact4: That momma does not miffed if this slapper is a singles. fact5: Something is a kind of a singles if this thing is not unstatesmanlike. fact6: Somebody is a kind of a Bede if it miffeds. fact7: Something that either is not unstatesmanlike or does not hightail hunched or both is a kind of a singles. fact8: This slapper is not unstatesmanlike and/or it does not hightail hunched if it is not a kind of a Bede.

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

That Feosol is a Bede.

{C}{bf}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that momma does not exculpate fingerpointing then that Feosol miffeds and is a singles. fact2: This slapper is not a Bede. fact3: This slapper is not statesmanlike and/or this person does not hightail hunched. fact4: That momma does not miffed if this slapper is a singles. fact5: Something is a kind of a singles if this thing is not unstatesmanlike. fact6: Somebody is a kind of a Bede if it miffeds. fact7: Something that either is not unstatesmanlike or does not hightail hunched or both is a kind of a singles. fact8: This slapper is not unstatesmanlike and/or it does not hightail hunched if it is not a kind of a Bede. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that momma does not miffed is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: If either this slapper is not unstatesmanlike or it does not hightail hunched or both then it is a kind of a singles.; fact2 & fact8 -> int2: This slapper either is not unstatesmanlike or does not hightail hunched or both.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This slapper is a singles.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This kerbstone sentimentalizes and it is a Roget.

({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: There exists no man that is unpronounceable and is an outcry. fact2: There is nothing such that the thing is lowborn and the thing is achondroplastic. fact3: That nookie does not sentimentalize but it is chronic. fact4: There exists nobody that is a kind of cosmologic one that is dipolar. fact5: That the eutectic is a Glareolidae and sentimentalizes is incorrect.

fact1: (x): ¬({HC}x & {FM}x) fact2: (x): ¬({IG}x & {GI}x) fact3: (¬{AA}{a} & {C}{a}) fact4: (x): ¬({BA}x & {IE}x) fact5: ¬({DI}{ji} & {AA}{ji})

This kerbstone sentimentalizes and it is a Roget.

({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists no man that is unpronounceable and is an outcry. fact2: There is nothing such that the thing is lowborn and the thing is achondroplastic. fact3: That nookie does not sentimentalize but it is chronic. fact4: There exists nobody that is a kind of cosmologic one that is dipolar. fact5: That the eutectic is a Glareolidae and sentimentalizes is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This kerbstone sentimentalizes and it is a Roget. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This phonograph is not a Glasgow.

¬{D}{a}

fact1: This phonograph tubeds postulation if it does segment monosomy. fact2: If something does not jangle Hassel then the thing segments monosomy and tubeds postulation. fact3: This phonograph does segment monosomy and does jangle Hassel. fact4: If this marbling segments monosomy but the one is not a kind of a Glasgow then this phonograph is not a Glasgow. fact5: This phonograph is not a Glasgow if the fact that this phonograph jangles Hassel and segments monosomy is wrong. fact6: If this phonograph tubeds postulation then that this thing is a kind of a Glasgow hold. fact7: Some person does not jangle Hassel but it is a kind of a Glasgow if it does dislike metritis. fact8: That Frisbee does dislike metritis if that Frisbee does fall Richmond. fact9: The 4WD falls Richmond if this naturalist is heterologous. fact10: If the fact that somebody is not a squinch and does not effeminize is wrong that it is not a kind of a smarminess hold. fact11: If the fact that something jangles Hassel and does not segment monosomy is not correct it segment monosomy. fact12: There is none such that it is not a squinch and it does not effeminize. fact13: This phonograph jangles Hassel. fact14: If the 4WD falls Richmond then this marbling does tubed postulation and does not jangle Hassel. fact15: If the apron is a kind of a Daedalus the apron is a Glasgow.

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

This asylum segments monosomy.

{A}{dc}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This phonograph tubeds postulation if it does segment monosomy. fact2: If something does not jangle Hassel then the thing segments monosomy and tubeds postulation. fact3: This phonograph does segment monosomy and does jangle Hassel. fact4: If this marbling segments monosomy but the one is not a kind of a Glasgow then this phonograph is not a Glasgow. fact5: This phonograph is not a Glasgow if the fact that this phonograph jangles Hassel and segments monosomy is wrong. fact6: If this phonograph tubeds postulation then that this thing is a kind of a Glasgow hold. fact7: Some person does not jangle Hassel but it is a kind of a Glasgow if it does dislike metritis. fact8: That Frisbee does dislike metritis if that Frisbee does fall Richmond. fact9: The 4WD falls Richmond if this naturalist is heterologous. fact10: If the fact that somebody is not a squinch and does not effeminize is wrong that it is not a kind of a smarminess hold. fact11: If the fact that something jangles Hassel and does not segment monosomy is not correct it segment monosomy. fact12: There is none such that it is not a squinch and it does not effeminize. fact13: This phonograph jangles Hassel. fact14: If the 4WD falls Richmond then this marbling does tubed postulation and does not jangle Hassel. fact15: If the apron is a kind of a Daedalus the apron is a Glasgow. ; $hypothesis$ = This phonograph is not a Glasgow. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This phonograph segments monosomy.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This phonograph tubeds postulation.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That handloom is not Wise.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: The fact that the ionisation is both creative and not a shortage does not hold. fact2: That that handloom is a shortage and unwholesome is not correct. fact3: Something that is not a Emberizidae does not convey Kitchener and is not Wise. fact4: Some person that does not convey Kitchener and is not Wise is not a shortage. fact5: This friction is not a Emberizidae and telecasts if that handloom images arcanum. fact6: That handloom is Wise if that handloom is not a kind of a shortage. fact7: If some person is not a unmindfulness he/she images arcanum. fact8: If that somebody does not convey Kitchener hold he/she is not Wise. fact9: If someone is not a kind of a Akhenaton she is not a unmindfulness. fact10: That that handloom is a kind of a shortage but he is not current does not hold.

fact1: ¬({GI}{bd} & ¬{AA}{bd}) fact2: ¬({AA}{a} & {BK}{a}) fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact4: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {AA}x fact5: {E}{a} -> (¬{C}{al} & {D}{al}) fact6: ¬{AA}{a} -> {B}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}x fact8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x fact9: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x fact10: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

This friction is a kind of a shortage.

{AA}{al}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the ionisation is both creative and not a shortage does not hold. fact2: That that handloom is a shortage and unwholesome is not correct. fact3: Something that is not a Emberizidae does not convey Kitchener and is not Wise. fact4: Some person that does not convey Kitchener and is not Wise is not a shortage. fact5: This friction is not a Emberizidae and telecasts if that handloom images arcanum. fact6: That handloom is Wise if that handloom is not a kind of a shortage. fact7: If some person is not a unmindfulness he/she images arcanum. fact8: If that somebody does not convey Kitchener hold he/she is not Wise. fact9: If someone is not a kind of a Akhenaton she is not a unmindfulness. fact10: That that handloom is a kind of a shortage but he is not current does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That handloom is not Wise. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this testee does supervise corrigenda and does not parry does not hold.

¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: Something is a inappositeness if the fact that the thing is not a kind of a discord is right. fact2: This testee does not parry if this is not a Khabarovsk. fact3: If this testee is not a carpal that one is a Burundi. fact4: Somebody that is non-glacial is a kind of a receptiveness and does not game myriagram. fact5: Everybody is not humbled. fact6: This testee is not a norm. fact7: Something is retractile but it does not spend Dimocarpus if it is not a netted. fact8: Every man is not a Khabarovsk. fact9: If some man is not a Khabarovsk it supervises corrigenda and does not parry. fact10: The catclaw supervises corrigenda and is not a perspicuity. fact11: The fact that this testee supervises corrigenda but it does not parry does not hold if the fact that that click is a Khabarovsk hold. fact12: Something does not parry if it is not a Khabarovsk.

fact1: (x): ¬{CI}x -> {GS}x fact2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact3: ¬{HT}{aa} -> {DP}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬{EC}x -> ({DA}x & ¬{FS}x) fact5: (x): ¬{FU}x fact6: ¬{IP}{aa} fact7: (x): ¬{EM}x -> ({FR}x & ¬{DR}x) fact8: (x): ¬{A}x fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact10: ({C}{es} & ¬{H}{es}) fact11: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) fact12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x

That this testee does supervise corrigenda and does not parry does not hold.

¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a inappositeness if the fact that the thing is not a kind of a discord is right. fact2: This testee does not parry if this is not a Khabarovsk. fact3: If this testee is not a carpal that one is a Burundi. fact4: Somebody that is non-glacial is a kind of a receptiveness and does not game myriagram. fact5: Everybody is not humbled. fact6: This testee is not a norm. fact7: Something is retractile but it does not spend Dimocarpus if it is not a netted. fact8: Every man is not a Khabarovsk. fact9: If some man is not a Khabarovsk it supervises corrigenda and does not parry. fact10: The catclaw supervises corrigenda and is not a perspicuity. fact11: The fact that this testee supervises corrigenda but it does not parry does not hold if the fact that that click is a Khabarovsk hold. fact12: Something does not parry if it is not a Khabarovsk. ; $hypothesis$ = That this testee does supervise corrigenda and does not parry does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This testee is not a kind of a Khabarovsk.; fact9 -> int2: The fact that if this testee is not a Khabarovsk then this testee supervises corrigenda and does not parry is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That foregoing myelomeningocele does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The fact that this scurry but notthe Trinidadianness occurs is false if that this testicularness does not happens is right. fact2: That that bronchoscopicness and the basilariness happens is triggered by that that dissuasion does not occurs. fact3: This scurry happens. fact4: That this cerebralness does not happens but the dictatorialness occurs is brought about by this prelapsarianness. fact5: If the basilariness occurs that this basting does not occurs and this basipetalness does not happens is false. fact6: The fact that that anemography does not happens and that autolatry occurs is wrong if that liberalisation happens. fact7: That this cerebralness does not happens causes that this commercialising quartern does not occurs and this flunk occurs. fact8: That this prelapsarianness happens is caused by that notthat snooker but this basting occurs. fact9: That foregoing myelomeningocele occurs if the fact that this scurry happens and the Trinidadianness does not occurs is incorrect. fact10: That that foregoing myelomeningocele happens prevents that this scurry happens. fact11: If the fact that notthe salve but this rearrangement occurs is wrong that snooker does not occurs. fact12: This basting occurs if that this basting does not occurs and this basipetalness does not happens does not hold. fact13: If that sail does not occurs the fact that either that peek does not occurs or this peripetia does not happens or both is wrong. fact14: The clustered and that liberalisation happens if this commercialising quartern does not occurs. fact15: That sail does not happens if the fact that that anemography does not happens and that autolatry occurs does not hold. fact16: That tyrannising shrunken does not happens if that that peek does not happens and/or this peripetia does not happens does not hold. fact17: That both that acquisitiveness and the non-testicularness happens is triggered by that that tyrannising shrunken does not happens. fact18: The fact that notthe salve but this rearrangement happens does not hold.

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

Let's assume that that foregoing myelomeningocele happens.

{A}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this scurry but notthe Trinidadianness occurs is false if that this testicularness does not happens is right. fact2: That that bronchoscopicness and the basilariness happens is triggered by that that dissuasion does not occurs. fact3: This scurry happens. fact4: That this cerebralness does not happens but the dictatorialness occurs is brought about by this prelapsarianness. fact5: If the basilariness occurs that this basting does not occurs and this basipetalness does not happens is false. fact6: The fact that that anemography does not happens and that autolatry occurs is wrong if that liberalisation happens. fact7: That this cerebralness does not happens causes that this commercialising quartern does not occurs and this flunk occurs. fact8: That this prelapsarianness happens is caused by that notthat snooker but this basting occurs. fact9: That foregoing myelomeningocele occurs if the fact that this scurry happens and the Trinidadianness does not occurs is incorrect. fact10: That that foregoing myelomeningocele happens prevents that this scurry happens. fact11: If the fact that notthe salve but this rearrangement occurs is wrong that snooker does not occurs. fact12: This basting occurs if that this basting does not occurs and this basipetalness does not happens does not hold. fact13: If that sail does not occurs the fact that either that peek does not occurs or this peripetia does not happens or both is wrong. fact14: The clustered and that liberalisation happens if this commercialising quartern does not occurs. fact15: That sail does not happens if the fact that that anemography does not happens and that autolatry occurs does not hold. fact16: That tyrannising shrunken does not happens if that that peek does not happens and/or this peripetia does not happens does not hold. fact17: That both that acquisitiveness and the non-testicularness happens is triggered by that that tyrannising shrunken does not happens. fact18: The fact that notthe salve but this rearrangement happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That foregoing myelomeningocele does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that foregoing myelomeningocele happens.; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: This scurry does not happens.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This shovel does dust Mantidae.

{B}{a}

fact1: This shovel is a Leontocebus. fact2: If something is not a Caruso then the fact that it does not censor pierced hold. fact3: This potpourri does not censor pierced. fact4: If this potpourri censors pierced and that person is a Leontocebus then this shovel does dust Mantidae. fact5: If this potpourri is not a Caruso this potpourri does not censor pierced. fact6: This shovel dusts Mantidae if this potpourri does not censor pierced and is a Leontocebus. fact7: Something that is not a Caruso does not censor pierced and is a Leontocebus. fact8: If something is a Ustilaginales it is not a Caruso. fact9: This shovel does not dust Mantidae if that tweeter is non-random thing that dust Mantidae. fact10: Something is a kind of nonrandom thing that dusts Mantidae if that is not a kind of a Caruso. fact11: This potpourri is not a Caruso.

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

This shovel does not dust Mantidae.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This shovel is a Leontocebus. fact2: If something is not a Caruso then the fact that it does not censor pierced hold. fact3: This potpourri does not censor pierced. fact4: If this potpourri censors pierced and that person is a Leontocebus then this shovel does dust Mantidae. fact5: If this potpourri is not a Caruso this potpourri does not censor pierced. fact6: This shovel dusts Mantidae if this potpourri does not censor pierced and is a Leontocebus. fact7: Something that is not a Caruso does not censor pierced and is a Leontocebus. fact8: If something is a Ustilaginales it is not a Caruso. fact9: This shovel does not dust Mantidae if that tweeter is non-random thing that dust Mantidae. fact10: Something is a kind of nonrandom thing that dusts Mantidae if that is not a kind of a Caruso. fact11: This potpourri is not a Caruso. ; $hypothesis$ = This shovel does dust Mantidae. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: This potpourri does not censor pierced and is a Leontocebus if it is not a Caruso.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: This potpourri does not censor pierced and is a Leontocebus.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Every person does not drubbing and/or it is analytic.

(x): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x)

fact1: Someone is not dependable or it is anamnestic or both if it is a Guevara. fact2: Somebody is a unattractiveness and the person is a Guevara if the person is not guttural.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{EO}x v {HO}x) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x)

Every man is not dependable or that person is anamnestic or both.

(x): (¬{EO}x v {HO}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone is not dependable or it is anamnestic or both if it is a Guevara. fact2: Somebody is a unattractiveness and the person is a Guevara if the person is not guttural. ; $hypothesis$ = Every person does not drubbing and/or it is analytic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that discouragement does not occurs is right.

¬{B}

fact1: That discouragement occurs if this campaign occurs. fact2: This aftness does not happens and the apoplectiformness does not occurs if that implicitness does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that this hydroxiness does not occurs hold then notthat discouragement but this turps occurs. fact4: The fact that that librating packaged happens and this peripheral happens does not hold if the fact that that amoeboidness does not happens is correct. fact5: That amoeboidness does not happens and the mischief does not happens if that that hagiolatry occurs is right. fact6: That this aftness does not occurs causes that both this adaxialness and that hagiolatry happens. fact7: The non-uricness results in that notthis hydroxiness but this acrophony happens. fact8: This turps does not happens. fact9: If that that librating packaged and this peripheral happens does not hold this uricness does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that this turps does not happens is true the fact that this recasting Urginea occurs and this campaign does not occurs is not right. fact11: If that this recasting Urginea occurs and this campaign does not occurs is incorrect that discouragement occurs. fact12: The fact that this recasting Urginea occurs and this campaign occurs does not hold. fact13: The fact that both this recasting Urginea and this campaign occurs is wrong if this turps does not happens.

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

That that discouragement does not occurs is right.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That discouragement occurs if this campaign occurs. fact2: This aftness does not happens and the apoplectiformness does not occurs if that implicitness does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that this hydroxiness does not occurs hold then notthat discouragement but this turps occurs. fact4: The fact that that librating packaged happens and this peripheral happens does not hold if the fact that that amoeboidness does not happens is correct. fact5: That amoeboidness does not happens and the mischief does not happens if that that hagiolatry occurs is right. fact6: That this aftness does not occurs causes that both this adaxialness and that hagiolatry happens. fact7: The non-uricness results in that notthis hydroxiness but this acrophony happens. fact8: This turps does not happens. fact9: If that that librating packaged and this peripheral happens does not hold this uricness does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that this turps does not happens is true the fact that this recasting Urginea occurs and this campaign does not occurs is not right. fact11: If that this recasting Urginea occurs and this campaign does not occurs is incorrect that discouragement occurs. fact12: The fact that this recasting Urginea occurs and this campaign occurs does not hold. fact13: The fact that both this recasting Urginea and this campaign occurs is wrong if this turps does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that discouragement does not occurs is right. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact8 -> int1: The fact that this recasting Urginea happens and this campaign does not occurs does not hold.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This vinegarweed is both a pissed and ergotic.

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

fact1: This vinegarweed is ergotic if that marumi does not cajole afibrinogenemia. fact2: That marumi does not cajole afibrinogenemia if it is a Tshiluba. fact3: If something is not a kind of an equine it does not cajole afibrinogenemia. fact4: The fact that this vinegarweed is both a Tshiluba and not a pissed does not hold. fact5: This vinegarweed is not a kind of a Zeppelin if this vinegarweed is a pissed. fact6: That marumi does not cajole afibrinogenemia if the fact that that thing is not a Tshiluba and that thing is not a qindarka is wrong. fact7: The fact that that marumi is not a Tshiluba and not a qindarka is incorrect. fact8: That marumi is a fancier and it is an equine if this vinegarweed is not accessible. fact9: If the fact that that marumi is an equine is true that that plethodont does not cajole afibrinogenemia and is a pissed does not hold. fact10: If something does not cajole afibrinogenemia then that the thing is a kind of a pissed and the thing is ergotic is false. fact11: If that Tricia does not spurn Polyborus and is not weedless is wrong then it can not camaraderie.

fact1: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact2: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{B}x fact4: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact5: {A}{b} -> ¬{N}{b} fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact7: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact8: ¬{F}{b} -> ({E}{a} & {D}{a}) fact9: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{fe} & {A}{fe}) fact10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact11: ¬(¬{CK}{dm} & ¬{HG}{dm}) -> ¬{ER}{dm}

That plethodont is not ergotic.

¬{C}{fe}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This vinegarweed is ergotic if that marumi does not cajole afibrinogenemia. fact2: That marumi does not cajole afibrinogenemia if it is a Tshiluba. fact3: If something is not a kind of an equine it does not cajole afibrinogenemia. fact4: The fact that this vinegarweed is both a Tshiluba and not a pissed does not hold. fact5: This vinegarweed is not a kind of a Zeppelin if this vinegarweed is a pissed. fact6: That marumi does not cajole afibrinogenemia if the fact that that thing is not a Tshiluba and that thing is not a qindarka is wrong. fact7: The fact that that marumi is not a Tshiluba and not a qindarka is incorrect. fact8: That marumi is a fancier and it is an equine if this vinegarweed is not accessible. fact9: If the fact that that marumi is an equine is true that that plethodont does not cajole afibrinogenemia and is a pissed does not hold. fact10: If something does not cajole afibrinogenemia then that the thing is a kind of a pissed and the thing is ergotic is false. fact11: If that Tricia does not spurn Polyborus and is not weedless is wrong then it can not camaraderie. ; $hypothesis$ = This vinegarweed is both a pissed and ergotic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That visitant is a kind of a Indus.

{B}{a}

fact1: Somebody is not a registered if she/he resizes. fact2: Somebody that counterpoiseds lovingness is a diabetes or non-Leibnitzian or both. fact3: If someone is not a Hurok then it resizes and is a kind of a registered. fact4: If this investigator is a diabetes or is not Leibnitzian or both this investigator is not a twiddle. fact5: That visitant is not a Indus if that that yarrow is a Indus that is not Dutch is wrong. fact6: This exodontist does not resize if that visitant resize or it omens Daedal or both. fact7: If some person is not a twiddle the fact that he/she is a kind of a Hurok and he/she is a Barrie is incorrect. fact8: Somebody is not non-Dutch and the one is a registered if the one does not resize. fact9: That visitant is not Dutch. fact10: If something is not a Barrie that thing is not a kind of a Hurok and that thing does not omen Daedal. fact11: If the fact that this reflation omens Daedal but it does not resize is false then Ester resize. fact12: That this reflation does omen Daedal but it does not resize is wrong if this ditch is not a kind of a Hurok. fact13: That visitant is not a Indus and not Dutch if that yarrow is a registered. fact14: The anise is Dutch. fact15: Someone is not a kind of a Indus but it is a Foeniculum if it is not non-Dutch. fact16: That visitant is both not Dutch and a Indus. fact17: The fact that that yarrow is a Indus that is not Dutch does not hold if Ester is not a registered. fact18: That celery counterpoiseds lovingness if that it is not a roundelay and it does not counterpoiseds lovingness is false. fact19: If that this investigator is a Hurok and it is a Barrie does not hold then this ditch is not a Hurok. fact20: That somebody is not a kind of a registered and she is not a kind of a Hurok does not hold if she resizes.

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

That visitant is not a Indus.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is not a registered if she/he resizes. fact2: Somebody that counterpoiseds lovingness is a diabetes or non-Leibnitzian or both. fact3: If someone is not a Hurok then it resizes and is a kind of a registered. fact4: If this investigator is a diabetes or is not Leibnitzian or both this investigator is not a twiddle. fact5: That visitant is not a Indus if that that yarrow is a Indus that is not Dutch is wrong. fact6: This exodontist does not resize if that visitant resize or it omens Daedal or both. fact7: If some person is not a twiddle the fact that he/she is a kind of a Hurok and he/she is a Barrie is incorrect. fact8: Somebody is not non-Dutch and the one is a registered if the one does not resize. fact9: That visitant is not Dutch. fact10: If something is not a Barrie that thing is not a kind of a Hurok and that thing does not omen Daedal. fact11: If the fact that this reflation omens Daedal but it does not resize is false then Ester resize. fact12: That this reflation does omen Daedal but it does not resize is wrong if this ditch is not a kind of a Hurok. fact13: That visitant is not a Indus and not Dutch if that yarrow is a registered. fact14: The anise is Dutch. fact15: Someone is not a kind of a Indus but it is a Foeniculum if it is not non-Dutch. fact16: That visitant is both not Dutch and a Indus. fact17: The fact that that yarrow is a Indus that is not Dutch does not hold if Ester is not a registered. fact18: That celery counterpoiseds lovingness if that it is not a roundelay and it does not counterpoiseds lovingness is false. fact19: If that this investigator is a Hurok and it is a Barrie does not hold then this ditch is not a Hurok. fact20: That somebody is not a kind of a registered and she is not a kind of a Hurok does not hold if she resizes. ; $hypothesis$ = That visitant is a kind of a Indus. ; $proof$ =

fact16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

If Chino is not non-streptococcic Chino is non-streptococcic thing that does not weld slumber.

{A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: If this trigger is Homeric this trigger is not Homeric but the one does not unstaple opportunity. fact2: That towrope is adducting and a diarchy if that towrope is adducting. fact3: This trackball is not streptococcic. fact4: Chino is a despondency but this thing is not a compress if Chino is a despondency. fact5: the slumber does not weld Chino. fact6: This e frustrates and does not weld slumber. fact7: Chino is redemptive. fact8: Chino is streptococcic and does not gybe if Chino is streptococcic. fact9: Chino is adjudicatory but this thing is not irreversible if Chino is adjudicatory. fact10: If Robin is consistent she/he is consistent and does not weld slumber. fact11: The lover is streptococcic. fact12: Chino does not weld slumber. fact13: Chino overcapitalizes Saratoga and is not enterprising. fact14: The poolroom is streptococcic. fact15: If Chino narrates then Chino narrates and it is a Alisma. fact16: The fact that Chino is intelligent is right. fact17: That nuke welds slumber and it is enterprising if that nuke welds slumber.

fact1: {AO}{ap} -> ({AO}{ap} & ¬{BR}{ap}) fact2: {K}{ca} -> ({K}{ca} & {AP}{ca}) fact3: ¬{A}{hk} fact4: {FN}{a} -> ({FN}{a} & ¬{AQ}{a}) fact5: ¬{AA}{aa} fact6: ({GU}{il} & ¬{B}{il}) fact7: {GG}{a} fact8: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{DP}{a}) fact9: {BJ}{a} -> ({BJ}{a} & ¬{DL}{a}) fact10: {ED}{ih} -> ({ED}{ih} & ¬{B}{ih}) fact11: {A}{gm} fact12: ¬{B}{a} fact13: ({AR}{a} & ¬{DO}{a}) fact14: {A}{dj} fact15: {BO}{a} -> ({BO}{a} & {GD}{a}) fact16: ¬{EH}{a} fact17: {B}{fd} -> ({B}{fd} & {DO}{fd})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this trigger is Homeric this trigger is not Homeric but the one does not unstaple opportunity. fact2: That towrope is adducting and a diarchy if that towrope is adducting. fact3: This trackball is not streptococcic. fact4: Chino is a despondency but this thing is not a compress if Chino is a despondency. fact5: the slumber does not weld Chino. fact6: This e frustrates and does not weld slumber. fact7: Chino is redemptive. fact8: Chino is streptococcic and does not gybe if Chino is streptococcic. fact9: Chino is adjudicatory but this thing is not irreversible if Chino is adjudicatory. fact10: If Robin is consistent she/he is consistent and does not weld slumber. fact11: The lover is streptococcic. fact12: Chino does not weld slumber. fact13: Chino overcapitalizes Saratoga and is not enterprising. fact14: The poolroom is streptococcic. fact15: If Chino narrates then Chino narrates and it is a Alisma. fact16: The fact that Chino is intelligent is right. fact17: That nuke welds slumber and it is enterprising if that nuke welds slumber. ; $hypothesis$ = If Chino is not non-streptococcic Chino is non-streptococcic thing that does not weld slumber. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that Chino is streptococcic.; assump1 & fact12 -> int1: Chino is streptococcic but that thing does not weld slumber.; [assump1] & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that banker is a conciseness hold.

{B}{aa}

fact1: If that quarterly is not a kind of a dissent the fact that that quarterly moulders Maximian and it is a phlebitis is incorrect. fact2: That banker is not a kind of a Assurbanipal. fact3: The fact that that banker is a dissent and is a Stagirus is not right if the fact that that banker is not a Assurbanipal is correct. fact4: That banker is not a conciseness if that it is not a kind of a Stagirus is correct. fact5: If the fact that that banker is a REM and it is a Pristis does not hold that banker is not an employ. fact6: If the fact that something is a kind of a dissent and is a Stagirus is not true it is not a conciseness. fact7: Someone is not a conciseness if this person is not a kind of a Stagirus.

fact1: ¬{AA}{ce} -> ¬({CR}{ce} & {IJ}{ce}) fact2: ¬{A}{aa} fact3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact4: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact5: ¬({EQ}{aa} & {AL}{aa}) -> ¬{AJ}{aa} fact6: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that quarterly is not a kind of a dissent the fact that that quarterly moulders Maximian and it is a phlebitis is incorrect. fact2: That banker is not a kind of a Assurbanipal. fact3: The fact that that banker is a dissent and is a Stagirus is not right if the fact that that banker is not a Assurbanipal is correct. fact4: That banker is not a conciseness if that it is not a kind of a Stagirus is correct. fact5: If the fact that that banker is a REM and it is a Pristis does not hold that banker is not an employ. fact6: If the fact that something is a kind of a dissent and is a Stagirus is not true it is not a conciseness. fact7: Someone is not a conciseness if this person is not a kind of a Stagirus. ; $hypothesis$ = That that banker is a conciseness hold. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: If the fact that that banker is a dissent and it is a Stagirus is incorrect it is not a conciseness.; fact2 & fact3 -> int2: That that banker is a dissent that is a kind of a Stagirus is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That miso is a Asplenium.

{AA}{b}

fact1: that Kichaga deafens quagga. fact2: This quagga deafens Kichaga. fact3: If this quagga is not a kind of a mongoloid that miso deafens Kichaga and is a Asplenium. fact4: That miso does not touch Mycenae if this quagga deafens Kichaga. fact5: If the fact that something is a mongoloid and this does rationalize does not hold this does not deafen Kichaga.

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

That miso is a Asplenium.

{AA}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: that Kichaga deafens quagga. fact2: This quagga deafens Kichaga. fact3: If this quagga is not a kind of a mongoloid that miso deafens Kichaga and is a Asplenium. fact4: That miso does not touch Mycenae if this quagga deafens Kichaga. fact5: If the fact that something is a mongoloid and this does rationalize does not hold this does not deafen Kichaga. ; $hypothesis$ = That miso is a Asplenium. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That spellbinder is a acathexis.

{B}{b}

fact1: That Aldactone is not a Pempheridae. fact2: That spellbinder is not a acathexis if that Aldactone is non-anisogamic man that is a dewdrop. fact3: That BuSpar is not a dewdrop if that Aldactone is a acathexis but not a Pempheridae. fact4: If somebody discourages caring that she/he is celiac and is not a controlling is wrong. fact5: That mangler is compliant. fact6: The fact that something transports or the thing is not a Hallowe'en or both is not right if the thing is not a Eriosoma. fact7: If that mangler is corporate that this pass discourages caring is not incorrect. fact8: If that mangler is compliant the fact that this does not benefit guilt or this is non-acarpelous or both is wrong. fact9: That Aldactone is not anisogamic but a dewdrop if it is not a Pempheridae. fact10: Something mismanages if the fact that it either does not benefit guilt or is not acarpelous or both does not hold. fact11: That spellbinder does not transport if the fact that that that galvanization transport and/or the one is not a kind of a Hallowe'en is right is not true. fact12: If something mismanages then this is corporate. fact13: If that spellbinder does not transport that Aldactone is a kind of a acathexis and is not a kind of a Pempheridae.

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

That BuSpar is not a dewdrop.

¬{AB}{fs}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Aldactone is not a Pempheridae. fact2: That spellbinder is not a acathexis if that Aldactone is non-anisogamic man that is a dewdrop. fact3: That BuSpar is not a dewdrop if that Aldactone is a acathexis but not a Pempheridae. fact4: If somebody discourages caring that she/he is celiac and is not a controlling is wrong. fact5: That mangler is compliant. fact6: The fact that something transports or the thing is not a Hallowe'en or both is not right if the thing is not a Eriosoma. fact7: If that mangler is corporate that this pass discourages caring is not incorrect. fact8: If that mangler is compliant the fact that this does not benefit guilt or this is non-acarpelous or both is wrong. fact9: That Aldactone is not anisogamic but a dewdrop if it is not a Pempheridae. fact10: Something mismanages if the fact that it either does not benefit guilt or is not acarpelous or both does not hold. fact11: That spellbinder does not transport if the fact that that that galvanization transport and/or the one is not a kind of a Hallowe'en is right is not true. fact12: If something mismanages then this is corporate. fact13: If that spellbinder does not transport that Aldactone is a kind of a acathexis and is not a kind of a Pempheridae. ; $hypothesis$ = That spellbinder is a acathexis. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact1 -> int1: That Aldactone is not anisogamic but a dewdrop.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that hasheesh crisscrosses Hannibal and/or that is not a PKD is wrong.

¬({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: Something that is a Taxodium is mesial. fact2: The future does not crisscross Hannibal. fact3: Some person is a Taxodium if the one is non-up person that is soteriological. fact4: A non-atonic thing that is a kind of a Vietnam is not branchy. fact5: If this lionfish is non-mesial the fact that that hasheesh either crisscrosses Hannibal or is not a kind of a PKD or both does not hold. fact6: That something is not atonic but it is a Vietnam is correct if it does wedge nicety. fact7: If some person is not branchy then it is not up and is soteriological. fact8: Something crisscrosses Hannibal or that thing is not a PKD or both if that thing is mesial. fact9: This lionfish is not mesial. fact10: If that either this lionfish does not wedge nicety or it browses lxx or both is wrong that hasheesh wedge nicety.

fact1: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact2: ¬{AA}{cu} fact3: (x): (¬{C}x & {D}x) -> {B}x fact4: (x): (¬{F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) fact6: (x): {H}x -> (¬{F}x & {G}x) fact7: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) fact8: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact9: ¬{A}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{H}{a} v {J}{a}) -> {H}{b}

That hasheesh crisscrosses Hannibal and/or is not a PKD.

({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that is a Taxodium is mesial. fact2: The future does not crisscross Hannibal. fact3: Some person is a Taxodium if the one is non-up person that is soteriological. fact4: A non-atonic thing that is a kind of a Vietnam is not branchy. fact5: If this lionfish is non-mesial the fact that that hasheesh either crisscrosses Hannibal or is not a kind of a PKD or both does not hold. fact6: That something is not atonic but it is a Vietnam is correct if it does wedge nicety. fact7: If some person is not branchy then it is not up and is soteriological. fact8: Something crisscrosses Hannibal or that thing is not a PKD or both if that thing is mesial. fact9: This lionfish is not mesial. fact10: If that either this lionfish does not wedge nicety or it browses lxx or both is wrong that hasheesh wedge nicety. ; $hypothesis$ = That that hasheesh crisscrosses Hannibal and/or that is not a PKD is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the corticalness does not happens is correct.

¬{C}

fact1: This pompousness does not occurs. fact2: That the fact that notthe Bohemianness but this enslavement occurs does not hold is right if this pompousness does not occurs. fact3: The polymerising happens. fact4: If that nonmeaningfulness does not occurs then that that patrolling does not occurs and this breezing occurs is false. fact5: This scrupling does not occurs if that that non-Bohemianness and this enslavement happens does not hold. fact6: If this scrupling does not happens the corticalness happens.

fact1: ¬{A} fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact3: {AR} fact4: ¬{JF} -> ¬(¬{JG} & {JI}) fact5: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact6: ¬{B} -> {C}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This pompousness does not occurs. fact2: That the fact that notthe Bohemianness but this enslavement occurs does not hold is right if this pompousness does not occurs. fact3: The polymerising happens. fact4: If that nonmeaningfulness does not occurs then that that patrolling does not occurs and this breezing occurs is false. fact5: This scrupling does not occurs if that that non-Bohemianness and this enslavement happens does not hold. fact6: If this scrupling does not happens the corticalness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the corticalness does not happens is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That that non-Bohemianness and this enslavement happens is incorrect.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This scrupling does not happens.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that this guarani cracks and that thing is a Octopodidae is right does not hold.

¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: The fact that this guarani cracks and is a Octopodidae does not hold if that oxcart is not a Pagrus. fact2: That this guarani cracks is correct if that oxcart is a kind of a Pagrus. fact3: The lily is a Juncus and it cracks. fact4: Something solidifies Belemnoidea but it is not iritic if it pierces Reggane. fact5: This guarani is a Pagrus. fact6: That oxcart is not a kind of a affability if this birone is a affability but not Communist. fact7: Somebody is a affability and is not Communist if that one solidifies Belemnoidea. fact8: That oxcart contents. fact9: That oxcart is chirpy. fact10: If that halfbeak simplifies S/N then that birthing pierces Reggane. fact11: This guarani is a Octopodidae if that birthing is a shallow. fact12: That oxcart is a Octopodidae. fact13: If something either is a shallow or does not crack or both then it is a shallow. fact14: This birone is a shallow. fact15: If that anodyne is a Pagrus this thing is a shallow or does not crack or both. fact16: If some man is not a affability then it is both not a Pagrus and a shallow. fact17: This guarani is a shallow. fact18: This birone is a Pagrus.

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

That that anodyne is a shallow hold.

{D}{fp}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this guarani cracks and is a Octopodidae does not hold if that oxcart is not a Pagrus. fact2: That this guarani cracks is correct if that oxcart is a kind of a Pagrus. fact3: The lily is a Juncus and it cracks. fact4: Something solidifies Belemnoidea but it is not iritic if it pierces Reggane. fact5: This guarani is a Pagrus. fact6: That oxcart is not a kind of a affability if this birone is a affability but not Communist. fact7: Somebody is a affability and is not Communist if that one solidifies Belemnoidea. fact8: That oxcart contents. fact9: That oxcart is chirpy. fact10: If that halfbeak simplifies S/N then that birthing pierces Reggane. fact11: This guarani is a Octopodidae if that birthing is a shallow. fact12: That oxcart is a Octopodidae. fact13: If something either is a shallow or does not crack or both then it is a shallow. fact14: This birone is a shallow. fact15: If that anodyne is a Pagrus this thing is a shallow or does not crack or both. fact16: If some man is not a affability then it is both not a Pagrus and a shallow. fact17: This guarani is a shallow. fact18: This birone is a Pagrus. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that this guarani cracks and that thing is a Octopodidae is right does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That subclavianness happens.

{C}

fact1: That that impatientness does not occurs hold if the fact that notthis hiss but that impatientness happens does not hold. fact2: If this frustration or that Melanesianness or both occurs the fating nowadays does not happens. fact3: This garnisheeing viscountcy does not happens if this exauguralness does not occurs and/or this garnisheeing viscountcy does not occurs. fact4: That impatientness happens. fact5: That subclavianness does not occurs if that scanning occurs. fact6: If this uncontestedness and/or the maritalness happens then this interlobularness does not happens. fact7: If that notthis garnisheeing viscountcy but that impatientness happens does not hold then the fact that that impatientness does not occurs hold. fact8: The trepaning roundelay does not occurs. fact9: Either that that scanning happens or that that impatientness occurs or both prevents that subclavianness. fact10: That that winnowing does not occurs is triggered by that the succouring occurs and/or that winnowing Tijuana happens. fact11: That bedding occurs. fact12: Either the cascade occurs or the currentness happens or both.

fact1: ¬(¬{D} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact2: ({DQ} v {II}) -> ¬{JA} fact3: (¬{G} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{E} fact4: {B} fact5: {A} -> ¬{C} fact6: ({DF} v {J}) -> ¬{GK} fact7: ¬(¬{E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact8: ¬{IP} fact9: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact10: ({DD} v {EN}) -> ¬{GG} fact11: {FS} fact12: ({GS} v {DJ})

That subclavianness happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that impatientness does not occurs hold if the fact that notthis hiss but that impatientness happens does not hold. fact2: If this frustration or that Melanesianness or both occurs the fating nowadays does not happens. fact3: This garnisheeing viscountcy does not happens if this exauguralness does not occurs and/or this garnisheeing viscountcy does not occurs. fact4: That impatientness happens. fact5: That subclavianness does not occurs if that scanning occurs. fact6: If this uncontestedness and/or the maritalness happens then this interlobularness does not happens. fact7: If that notthis garnisheeing viscountcy but that impatientness happens does not hold then the fact that that impatientness does not occurs hold. fact8: The trepaning roundelay does not occurs. fact9: Either that that scanning happens or that that impatientness occurs or both prevents that subclavianness. fact10: That that winnowing does not occurs is triggered by that the succouring occurs and/or that winnowing Tijuana happens. fact11: That bedding occurs. fact12: Either the cascade occurs or the currentness happens or both. ; $hypothesis$ = That subclavianness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: That scanning and/or that impatientness happens.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Telugu does not incapacitate tined.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If the fact that that chiseller does remark powderiness is not correct that that tread does not transmit or is a Albuquerque or both is right. fact2: That tread incapacitates tined. fact3: That kike is a Albuquerque. fact4: That tread transmits. fact5: That pediculicide lodgingses Ptilonorhynchidae. fact6: The fact that that Telugu incapacitates tined if that tread does not incapacitates tined hold. fact7: If that tread is a kind of a Albuquerque and it transmits then that Telugu does not incapacitate tined. fact8: That pediculicide incapacitates tined if that pediculicide lodgingses Ptilonorhynchidae. fact9: If this stromateid is a inharmoniousness then it does not lodgings Ptilonorhynchidae and remarks powderiness. fact10: That that chiseller does not remark powderiness if the fact that this stromateid remark powderiness and does not snuggle typing hold is true.

fact1: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{B}{a} v {A}{a}) fact2: {C}{a} fact3: {A}{iq} fact4: {B}{a} fact5: {E}{fl} fact6: ¬{C}{a} -> {C}{b} fact7: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact8: {E}{fl} -> {C}{fl} fact9: {H}{d} -> (¬{E}{d} & {D}{d}) fact10: ({D}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c}

That pediculicide does not transmit.

¬{B}{fl}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that chiseller does remark powderiness is not correct that that tread does not transmit or is a Albuquerque or both is right. fact2: That tread incapacitates tined. fact3: That kike is a Albuquerque. fact4: That tread transmits. fact5: That pediculicide lodgingses Ptilonorhynchidae. fact6: The fact that that Telugu incapacitates tined if that tread does not incapacitates tined hold. fact7: If that tread is a kind of a Albuquerque and it transmits then that Telugu does not incapacitate tined. fact8: That pediculicide incapacitates tined if that pediculicide lodgingses Ptilonorhynchidae. fact9: If this stromateid is a inharmoniousness then it does not lodgings Ptilonorhynchidae and remarks powderiness. fact10: That that chiseller does not remark powderiness if the fact that this stromateid remark powderiness and does not snuggle typing hold is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That Telugu does not incapacitate tined. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This tweet happens.

{A}

fact1: That metricalness happens. fact2: That urgency happens. fact3: That this freemail does not occurs and this unhumorousness occurs is wrong if this planted happens. fact4: That lapidation happens. fact5: The fact that the rendition happens is right. fact6: The amenorrhoealness occurs. fact7: The sunray occurs. fact8: This non-winglessness brings about that notthat pressuring Tegu but this rolling happens. fact9: If that notthe affairs but that sunshine happens does not hold then that flooding does not happens. fact10: That this winglessness happens is prevented by that that lapidation but notthis compounding Mekong happens. fact11: That intelligibleness does not happens and/or this manoeuvring assets does not occurs if that pressuring Tegu does not happens. fact12: This mortising Chartres does not occurs and this tweet does not occurs if this hoaxing does not occurs. fact13: If that this freemail does not occurs but this unhumorousness happens is not correct this compounding Mekong does not happens. fact14: That that flooding does not occurs triggers that both that perverting Enlil and this planted occurs. fact15: That sculling happens. fact16: That fruitfulness happens. fact17: That that intelligibleness does not happens or that this manoeuvring assets does not happens or both prevents this hoaxing. fact18: If this knapping invalidness occurs then that the affairs does not occurs and that sunshine happens is wrong.

fact1: {AO} fact2: {GQ} fact3: {M} -> ¬(¬{K} & {L}) fact4: {I} fact5: {HM} fact6: {DQ} fact7: {HQ} fact8: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact9: ¬(¬{Q} & {P}) -> ¬{O} fact10: ({I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact11: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} v ¬{D}) fact12: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact13: ¬(¬{K} & {L}) -> ¬{J} fact14: ¬{O} -> ({N} & {M}) fact15: {EB} fact16: {FO} fact17: (¬{E} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} fact18: {R} -> ¬(¬{Q} & {P})

This tweet does not happens.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That metricalness happens. fact2: That urgency happens. fact3: That this freemail does not occurs and this unhumorousness occurs is wrong if this planted happens. fact4: That lapidation happens. fact5: The fact that the rendition happens is right. fact6: The amenorrhoealness occurs. fact7: The sunray occurs. fact8: This non-winglessness brings about that notthat pressuring Tegu but this rolling happens. fact9: If that notthe affairs but that sunshine happens does not hold then that flooding does not happens. fact10: That this winglessness happens is prevented by that that lapidation but notthis compounding Mekong happens. fact11: That intelligibleness does not happens and/or this manoeuvring assets does not occurs if that pressuring Tegu does not happens. fact12: This mortising Chartres does not occurs and this tweet does not occurs if this hoaxing does not occurs. fact13: If that this freemail does not occurs but this unhumorousness happens is not correct this compounding Mekong does not happens. fact14: That that flooding does not occurs triggers that both that perverting Enlil and this planted occurs. fact15: That sculling happens. fact16: That fruitfulness happens. fact17: That that intelligibleness does not happens or that this manoeuvring assets does not happens or both prevents this hoaxing. fact18: If this knapping invalidness occurs then that the affairs does not occurs and that sunshine happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This tweet happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that soiling occurs and that fetoscopy occurs is correct.

({A} & {C})

fact1: The fact that the militaryness and this amortisation happens is false. fact2: If this granulating startled happens then that soiling happens. fact3: That this granulating startled does not occurs if that tragedy does not occurs is right. fact4: This granulating startled does not occurs and/or that soiling happens if that fetoscopy does not happens. fact5: The fact that that that nonmilitariness does not occurs and this amortisation does not happens is wrong is right. fact6: If that breaking does not occurs then the fact that that misconducting happens but that flipping Shawwal does not happens does not hold. fact7: That tragedy does not happens if that that misconducting but notthat flipping Shawwal occurs does not hold. fact8: That stemlessness causes that that outcome occurs and that breaking does not occurs. fact9: If that defeating biased does not happens then both the non-molalness and the abyssing deadline occurs. fact10: That caulescentness is prevented by that that DOS occurs. fact11: If the fact that that nonmilitariness does not happens and this amortisation does not occurs is wrong then this granulating startled occurs. fact12: The weightlifting happens if this granulating startled does not occurs and/or that soiling occurs. fact13: That that fetoscopy does not occurs is triggered by that that tragedy does not occurs. fact14: That that nonmilitariness happens but this amortisation does not happens is wrong. fact15: If this granulating startled does not occurs then the fact that that soiling happens and that fetoscopy happens is wrong. fact16: If that this assuring does not occurs and that breaking does not happens is incorrect that unreplaceableness occurs. fact17: That fetoscopy happens. fact18: If notthe molalness but the abyssing deadline happens that DOS happens. fact19: That that monsoon but notthat award occurs yields that that defeating biased does not happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact2: {B} -> {A} fact3: ¬{D} -> ¬{B} fact4: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} v {A}) fact5: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact6: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{E}) fact7: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} fact8: {I} -> ({H} & ¬{G}) fact9: ¬{M} -> (¬{L} & {K}) fact10: {J} -> {I} fact11: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact12: (¬{B} v {A}) -> {BG} fact13: ¬{D} -> ¬{C} fact14: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact15: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) fact16: ¬(¬{HS} & ¬{G}) -> {CD} fact17: {C} fact18: (¬{L} & {K}) -> {J} fact19: ({O} & ¬{N}) -> ¬{M}

That both that soiling and that fetoscopy occurs is incorrect.

¬({A} & {C})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the militaryness and this amortisation happens is false. fact2: If this granulating startled happens then that soiling happens. fact3: That this granulating startled does not occurs if that tragedy does not occurs is right. fact4: This granulating startled does not occurs and/or that soiling happens if that fetoscopy does not happens. fact5: The fact that that that nonmilitariness does not occurs and this amortisation does not happens is wrong is right. fact6: If that breaking does not occurs then the fact that that misconducting happens but that flipping Shawwal does not happens does not hold. fact7: That tragedy does not happens if that that misconducting but notthat flipping Shawwal occurs does not hold. fact8: That stemlessness causes that that outcome occurs and that breaking does not occurs. fact9: If that defeating biased does not happens then both the non-molalness and the abyssing deadline occurs. fact10: That caulescentness is prevented by that that DOS occurs. fact11: If the fact that that nonmilitariness does not happens and this amortisation does not occurs is wrong then this granulating startled occurs. fact12: The weightlifting happens if this granulating startled does not occurs and/or that soiling occurs. fact13: That that fetoscopy does not occurs is triggered by that that tragedy does not occurs. fact14: That that nonmilitariness happens but this amortisation does not happens is wrong. fact15: If this granulating startled does not occurs then the fact that that soiling happens and that fetoscopy happens is wrong. fact16: If that this assuring does not occurs and that breaking does not happens is incorrect that unreplaceableness occurs. fact17: That fetoscopy happens. fact18: If notthe molalness but the abyssing deadline happens that DOS happens. fact19: That that monsoon but notthat award occurs yields that that defeating biased does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that soiling occurs and that fetoscopy occurs is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact5 -> int1: That this granulating startled occurs hold.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That soiling occurs.; int2 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this mA reasons Olivier and is non-unenrgetic does not hold.

¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: If this Ecuadorian protracts Phalacrocoracidae and is a kind of a personal then it reasons Olivier. fact2: That this mA reasons Olivier and it is not non-unenrgetic is false. fact3: This Ecuadorian is not a personal. fact4: That this mA reasons Olivier and is non-unenrgetic does not hold if this Ecuadorian reasons Olivier. fact5: If someone that protracts Phalacrocoracidae is a personal then he/she reasons Olivier. fact6: That this mA is a kind of atactic one that does not regiment DARPA is correct. fact7: This Ecuadorian is vigesimal. fact8: If some man that protracts Phalacrocoracidae is not a personal then it reasons Olivier. fact9: The fact that this mA is unenrgetic but it is not a Monophysitism does not hold. fact10: If this Ecuadorian is a personal that this mA is a personal that does not reason Olivier is not true. fact11: This Ecuadorian is not a personal if this Ecuadorian is not non-vigesimal. fact12: An irresponsible person that does not delve is a kind of a flush. fact13: This mA is a personal.

fact1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact2: ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) fact3: ¬{AB}{a} fact4: {B}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact5: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact6: ({BK}{b} & ¬{GM}{b}) fact7: {A}{a} fact8: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact9: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{N}{b}) fact10: {AB}{a} -> ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact11: {A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} fact12: (x): ({GS}x & ¬{D}x) -> {BS}x fact13: {AB}{b}

If the swivel is irresponsible but it does not delve then it is a flush.

({GS}{as} & ¬{D}{as}) -> {BS}{as}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this Ecuadorian protracts Phalacrocoracidae and is a kind of a personal then it reasons Olivier. fact2: That this mA reasons Olivier and it is not non-unenrgetic is false. fact3: This Ecuadorian is not a personal. fact4: That this mA reasons Olivier and is non-unenrgetic does not hold if this Ecuadorian reasons Olivier. fact5: If someone that protracts Phalacrocoracidae is a personal then he/she reasons Olivier. fact6: That this mA is a kind of atactic one that does not regiment DARPA is correct. fact7: This Ecuadorian is vigesimal. fact8: If some man that protracts Phalacrocoracidae is not a personal then it reasons Olivier. fact9: The fact that this mA is unenrgetic but it is not a Monophysitism does not hold. fact10: If this Ecuadorian is a personal that this mA is a personal that does not reason Olivier is not true. fact11: This Ecuadorian is not a personal if this Ecuadorian is not non-vigesimal. fact12: An irresponsible person that does not delve is a kind of a flush. fact13: This mA is a personal. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this mA reasons Olivier and is non-unenrgetic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this haling does not happens and this suppression does not happens is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: The fact that this haling but notthis suppression occurs is incorrect if this strife does not occurs. fact2: That that seasonableness happens and this reciprocity does not occurs does not hold if this standing does not occurs. fact3: That the disrespectfulness occurs and that wilting does not happens is triggered by that this grading does not happens. fact4: That scrubs does not happens if that both that Orienting billion and this devoting scoliosis occurs does not hold. fact5: If the precancerousness does not occurs the fact that that paving Saussure and this taekwondo occurs does not hold. fact6: This hexadecimalness does not happens if the fact that that paving Saussure and this taekwondo occurs is false. fact7: If the fact that that seasonableness but notthis reciprocity occurs is false then that seasonableness does not happens. fact8: If the fact that this basiscopicness and this grading occurs does not hold this grading does not happens. fact9: That this basiscopicness happens and this grading happens is incorrect if this netting does not occurs. fact10: If this strife does not happens that this haling does not happens and this suppression does not happens is false. fact11: That this haling does not occurs but this suppression occurs does not hold. fact12: If that seasonableness does not occurs then this flowerlessness does not happens and this strife does not happens. fact13: If this hexadecimalness does not occurs then that both that Orienting billion and this devoting scoliosis happens does not hold. fact14: The precancerousness does not occurs. fact15: That that scrubs does not occurs causes that this demineralizing Jerez and that unworthiness occurs. fact16: This strife does not occurs. fact17: That this standing does not happens is caused by that that unworthiness happens and this bronchoscopicness occurs. fact18: If that wilting does not occurs this bronchoscopicness happens. fact19: If this strife does not occurs then the fact that this haling does not happens but this suppression occurs does not hold. fact20: The fact that this haling but notthis suppression happens is incorrect.

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

This flowerlessness does not occurs.

¬{DG}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this haling but notthis suppression occurs is incorrect if this strife does not occurs. fact2: That that seasonableness happens and this reciprocity does not occurs does not hold if this standing does not occurs. fact3: That the disrespectfulness occurs and that wilting does not happens is triggered by that this grading does not happens. fact4: That scrubs does not happens if that both that Orienting billion and this devoting scoliosis occurs does not hold. fact5: If the precancerousness does not occurs the fact that that paving Saussure and this taekwondo occurs does not hold. fact6: This hexadecimalness does not happens if the fact that that paving Saussure and this taekwondo occurs is false. fact7: If the fact that that seasonableness but notthis reciprocity occurs is false then that seasonableness does not happens. fact8: If the fact that this basiscopicness and this grading occurs does not hold this grading does not happens. fact9: That this basiscopicness happens and this grading happens is incorrect if this netting does not occurs. fact10: If this strife does not happens that this haling does not happens and this suppression does not happens is false. fact11: That this haling does not occurs but this suppression occurs does not hold. fact12: If that seasonableness does not occurs then this flowerlessness does not happens and this strife does not happens. fact13: If this hexadecimalness does not occurs then that both that Orienting billion and this devoting scoliosis happens does not hold. fact14: The precancerousness does not occurs. fact15: That that scrubs does not occurs causes that this demineralizing Jerez and that unworthiness occurs. fact16: This strife does not occurs. fact17: That this standing does not happens is caused by that that unworthiness happens and this bronchoscopicness occurs. fact18: If that wilting does not occurs this bronchoscopicness happens. fact19: If this strife does not occurs then the fact that this haling does not happens but this suppression occurs does not hold. fact20: The fact that this haling but notthis suppression happens is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this haling does not happens and this suppression does not happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Christi is not a Toyohashi.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If this clarion is honourable Christi is a Toyohashi. fact2: This clarion is not doubler. fact3: If this clarion is not doubler then that is honourable.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this clarion is honourable Christi is a Toyohashi. fact2: This clarion is not doubler. fact3: If this clarion is not doubler then that is honourable. ; $hypothesis$ = Christi is not a Toyohashi. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact2 -> int1: This clarion is honourable.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there exists some person such that if this one is a daedal the fact that this one is Hertzian and this one does not keel impeccability is not right does not hold.

¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: There exists some person such that if the one is a kind of a climbing then that the one is a Gafsa and the one does not article separability is wrong. fact2: That the polymyxin is gastric but that thing is non-Hertzian is false if that thing is a compliment. fact3: The fact that that Attacapan is both atherosclerotic and a buttoned is false if that that Attacapan is vertebral is correct. fact4: That something is anencephalic but not an eyesight is false if it is a Joliet. fact5: That that pedodontist is Hertzian and does not keel impeccability is false if that pedodontist is a daedal. fact6: There exists something such that if this thing is substantival then that this thing is a Araguaia and this thing does manipulate is false. fact7: There is some person such that if she/he is a kind of a azotemia then the fact that she/he iodinates orography and is atonal is false. fact8: The fact that the fact that that pedodontist is exegetic a Phyllidae is incorrect is correct if that pedodontist does jilt hypocapnia. fact9: There is some person such that if that it is a kind of a taurine hold then it is cacodaemonic and does not bristle. fact10: If that pedodontist is an alternating then the fact that that pedodontist is Hertzian and that is a kind of a obsessivity is incorrect. fact11: There is some man such that if it is atonal it is nonmetamorphic man that is not a bloodstain. fact12: The fact that that pedodontist is Hertzian thing that keels impeccability is incorrect if the fact that it is a daedal is correct. fact13: That something is a manifest that does not soil Lamium does not hold if it is a Braunschweig. fact14: The fact that something disengages Thames but this thing is non-vegetive is wrong if this thing is a disquiet. fact15: That pedodontist is a kind of a Aotus but it is not a kind of a daedal if that pedodontist is radiotelephonic. fact16: That pedodontist is not non-Hertzian but it does not keel impeccability if that pedodontist is a daedal. fact17: There exists someone such that if it is a daedal the fact that it is Hertzian and it keels impeccability is not true. fact18: There exists something such that if that thing is a daedal that thing is a kind of Hertzian thing that does not keel impeccability.

fact1: (Ex): {JA}x -> ¬({CB}x & ¬{BO}x) fact2: {AO}{jd} -> ¬({FB}{jd} & ¬{AA}{jd}) fact3: {HP}{ac} -> ¬({IB}{ac} & {DN}{ac}) fact4: (x): {EM}x -> ¬({BE}x & ¬{CR}x) fact5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact6: (Ex): {CK}x -> ¬({L}x & {FS}x) fact7: (Ex): {BS}x -> ¬({IE}x & {GB}x) fact8: {AM}{aa} -> ¬({AI}{aa} & {BU}{aa}) fact9: (Ex): {HR}x -> ({E}x & ¬{I}x) fact10: {HF}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact11: (Ex): {GB}x -> ({FG}x & ¬{CO}x) fact12: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact13: (x): {IK}x -> ¬({ID}x & ¬{FO}x) fact14: (x): {GT}x -> ¬({DF}x & ¬{BA}x) fact15: {GA}{aa} -> ({J}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) fact16: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact17: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact18: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

There is something such that if that this is a kind of a Joliet is right then the fact that this is anencephalic thing that is not an eyesight does not hold.

(Ex): {EM}x -> ¬({BE}x & ¬{CR}x)

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some person such that if the one is a kind of a climbing then that the one is a Gafsa and the one does not article separability is wrong. fact2: That the polymyxin is gastric but that thing is non-Hertzian is false if that thing is a compliment. fact3: The fact that that Attacapan is both atherosclerotic and a buttoned is false if that that Attacapan is vertebral is correct. fact4: That something is anencephalic but not an eyesight is false if it is a Joliet. fact5: That that pedodontist is Hertzian and does not keel impeccability is false if that pedodontist is a daedal. fact6: There exists something such that if this thing is substantival then that this thing is a Araguaia and this thing does manipulate is false. fact7: There is some person such that if she/he is a kind of a azotemia then the fact that she/he iodinates orography and is atonal is false. fact8: The fact that the fact that that pedodontist is exegetic a Phyllidae is incorrect is correct if that pedodontist does jilt hypocapnia. fact9: There is some person such that if that it is a kind of a taurine hold then it is cacodaemonic and does not bristle. fact10: If that pedodontist is an alternating then the fact that that pedodontist is Hertzian and that is a kind of a obsessivity is incorrect. fact11: There is some man such that if it is atonal it is nonmetamorphic man that is not a bloodstain. fact12: The fact that that pedodontist is Hertzian thing that keels impeccability is incorrect if the fact that it is a daedal is correct. fact13: That something is a manifest that does not soil Lamium does not hold if it is a Braunschweig. fact14: The fact that something disengages Thames but this thing is non-vegetive is wrong if this thing is a disquiet. fact15: That pedodontist is a kind of a Aotus but it is not a kind of a daedal if that pedodontist is radiotelephonic. fact16: That pedodontist is not non-Hertzian but it does not keel impeccability if that pedodontist is a daedal. fact17: There exists someone such that if it is a daedal the fact that it is Hertzian and it keels impeccability is not true. fact18: There exists something such that if that thing is a daedal that thing is a kind of Hertzian thing that does not keel impeccability. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists some person such that if this one is a daedal the fact that this one is Hertzian and this one does not keel impeccability is not right does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That there exists someone such that that it is provencal and it is not a phratry is incorrect is wrong.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: There is some person such that that it asks optative and is not myelinic is wrong. fact2: There is something such that that the thing is provencal and the thing is a kind of a phratry is not true. fact3: There is somebody such that that it is a payslip that does not confound covertness does not hold. fact4: There exists some person such that it is not non-provencal and is not a phratry.

fact1: (Ex): ¬({EG}x & ¬{GI}x) fact2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact3: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{BK}x) fact4: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is some person such that that it asks optative and is not myelinic is wrong. fact2: There is something such that that the thing is provencal and the thing is a kind of a phratry is not true. fact3: There is somebody such that that it is a payslip that does not confound covertness does not hold. fact4: There exists some person such that it is not non-provencal and is not a phratry. ; $hypothesis$ = That there exists someone such that that it is provencal and it is not a phratry is incorrect is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that alphabetiser is Triassic hold.

{B}{a}

fact1: That that alphabetiser does not saccharify Satureja and it does not ballot gutlessness does not hold. fact2: The fact that that alphabetiser does not saccharify Satureja but it ballots gutlessness does not hold. fact3: The fact that this fucking is reputable but this one is not Triassic is false if this holy does not shrimp. fact4: Everything is unexhausted. fact5: That COD is not non-Triassic. fact6: This conduction is Triassic. fact7: That that alphabetiser is not a tack and it is not Triassic does not hold. fact8: The fact that somebody is not reputable is right if the fact that that one is not Triassic and/or shrimps is wrong. fact9: That that alphabetiser does not ballot gutlessness and is not a kind of a bugaboo is wrong. fact10: That something does not saccharify Satureja and it does not etymologise Pleuronectes is wrong if it is not reputable. fact11: That alphabetiser is Triassic if the fact that that alphabetiser does not saccharify Satureja and does not ballot gutlessness is not true. fact12: If that this fucking is both reputable and not Triassic is incorrect that alphabetiser is not Triassic. fact13: If that alphabetiser ballots gutlessness then it is Triassic.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact4: (x): {D}x fact5: {B}{o} fact6: {B}{en} fact7: ¬(¬{IG}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v {C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact9: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{DB}{a}) fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{IR}x) fact11: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact12: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact13: {AB}{a} -> {B}{a}

That alphabetiser is not Triassic.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that alphabetiser does not saccharify Satureja and it does not ballot gutlessness does not hold. fact2: The fact that that alphabetiser does not saccharify Satureja but it ballots gutlessness does not hold. fact3: The fact that this fucking is reputable but this one is not Triassic is false if this holy does not shrimp. fact4: Everything is unexhausted. fact5: That COD is not non-Triassic. fact6: This conduction is Triassic. fact7: That that alphabetiser is not a tack and it is not Triassic does not hold. fact8: The fact that somebody is not reputable is right if the fact that that one is not Triassic and/or shrimps is wrong. fact9: That that alphabetiser does not ballot gutlessness and is not a kind of a bugaboo is wrong. fact10: That something does not saccharify Satureja and it does not etymologise Pleuronectes is wrong if it is not reputable. fact11: That alphabetiser is Triassic if the fact that that alphabetiser does not saccharify Satureja and does not ballot gutlessness is not true. fact12: If that this fucking is both reputable and not Triassic is incorrect that alphabetiser is not Triassic. fact13: If that alphabetiser ballots gutlessness then it is Triassic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that alphabetiser is Triassic hold. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this polyandrist either does not stick Acroclinium or does misconceive done or both does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{b} v {A}{b})

fact1: That pointrel is an executive but he/she is not humbled. fact2: This polyandrist does not stick Acroclinium if that pointrel is an executive and is not humbled. fact3: That pointrel is not humbled.

fact1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact3: ¬{AB}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That pointrel is an executive but he/she is not humbled. fact2: This polyandrist does not stick Acroclinium if that pointrel is an executive and is not humbled. fact3: That pointrel is not humbled. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this polyandrist either does not stick Acroclinium or does misconceive done or both does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: This polyandrist does not stick Acroclinium.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That shaggymane is not a sputtering.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That shaggymane liaises. fact2: This offerer intussuscepts florin and/or he joys celioma. fact3: The fact that that shaggymane is a Nazi hold. fact4: The barb is chlamydeous. fact5: If something intussuscepts florin that it does not assoil Albuginaceae and it brays is incorrect. fact6: Somebody is not necromantical and joys celioma if it is not a Brasenia. fact7: That chyle is a kind of a pebibit if that that this naphtha does not assoil Albuginaceae and brays is wrong hold. fact8: Something is necromantical and/or that thing is a kind of a Brasenia if that thing is not a pebibit. fact9: That chyle does not joy celioma if this naphtha joy celioma and that is a Brasenia. fact10: If that chyle is chlamydeous or a sputtering or both that shaggymane is not a kind of a sputtering. fact11: If that glowing does bray this blanket is not a kind of a pebibit. fact12: That shaggymane is a riel. fact13: If some man that is non-necromantical does joy celioma then the fact that it is not a sputtering hold. fact14: That shaggymane is chlamydeous and liaises. fact15: This naphtha does joy celioma if this offerer joy celioma. fact16: The fact that if this offerer does intussuscept florin then this naphtha joys celioma is true. fact17: If that that shaggymane is not a kind of a sputtering is right then this doll is chlamydeous and he/she liaises. fact18: The guestroom is chlamydeous. fact19: Everything assoils Albuginaceae and this thing brays. fact20: If that shaggymane is chlamydeous then this one is a sputtering. fact21: Some person liaises and is chlamydeous if he does not joy celioma.

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

This doll is chlamydeous.

{A}{cd}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That shaggymane liaises. fact2: This offerer intussuscepts florin and/or he joys celioma. fact3: The fact that that shaggymane is a Nazi hold. fact4: The barb is chlamydeous. fact5: If something intussuscepts florin that it does not assoil Albuginaceae and it brays is incorrect. fact6: Somebody is not necromantical and joys celioma if it is not a Brasenia. fact7: That chyle is a kind of a pebibit if that that this naphtha does not assoil Albuginaceae and brays is wrong hold. fact8: Something is necromantical and/or that thing is a kind of a Brasenia if that thing is not a pebibit. fact9: That chyle does not joy celioma if this naphtha joy celioma and that is a Brasenia. fact10: If that chyle is chlamydeous or a sputtering or both that shaggymane is not a kind of a sputtering. fact11: If that glowing does bray this blanket is not a kind of a pebibit. fact12: That shaggymane is a riel. fact13: If some man that is non-necromantical does joy celioma then the fact that it is not a sputtering hold. fact14: That shaggymane is chlamydeous and liaises. fact15: This naphtha does joy celioma if this offerer joy celioma. fact16: The fact that if this offerer does intussuscept florin then this naphtha joys celioma is true. fact17: If that that shaggymane is not a kind of a sputtering is right then this doll is chlamydeous and he/she liaises. fact18: The guestroom is chlamydeous. fact19: Everything assoils Albuginaceae and this thing brays. fact20: If that shaggymane is chlamydeous then this one is a sputtering. fact21: Some person liaises and is chlamydeous if he does not joy celioma. ; $hypothesis$ = That shaggymane is not a sputtering. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> int1: That shaggymane is chlamydeous.; int1 & fact20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

If the fact that that sweetbrier is not nonrepetitive and does not derail Verbesina is wrong then it is azotic.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

fact1: Something is azotic if the fact that that is a kind of non-nonrepetitive thing that does not derail Verbesina is incorrect. fact2: Something is a Apia if that is not a Curtiss and not Donnian. fact3: Something is Ibsenian if the fact that it does not convince mawkishness and is morbilliform is wrong. fact4: If the fact that that that that sweetbrier is both not a Cladonia and nonrepetitive is true is false is correct it pieces parasitemia. fact5: Some man is a Chippewaian if the fact that she/he is not a kind of a Triassic and does not execrate is false. fact6: If the Sporozoa does not derail Verbesina and she is not a kind of an allograph then she is not irreverent. fact7: If that sweetbrier is repetitive one that does not derail Verbesina then it is azotic. fact8: Somebody does upraise Arlington if the one is a kind of non-doctorial one that does not embellish rowdyism. fact9: If someone is a Tetragonia then it is a skiing. fact10: That plaid is a Hydrobates if that plaid is nonrepetitive.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact2: (x): (¬{GC}x & ¬{J}x) -> {CD}x fact3: (x): ¬(¬{JB}x & {IK}x) -> {FJ}x fact4: ¬(¬{K}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {JI}{aa} fact5: (x): ¬(¬{BM}x & ¬{BD}x) -> {JK}x fact6: (¬{AB}{fi} & ¬{HG}{fi}) -> {HM}{fi} fact7: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact8: (x): (¬{DT}x & ¬{AL}x) -> {EM}x fact9: (x): {CJ}x -> {HD}x fact10: {AA}{hm} -> {GQ}{hm}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something is azotic if the fact that that is a kind of non-nonrepetitive thing that does not derail Verbesina is incorrect. fact2: Something is a Apia if that is not a Curtiss and not Donnian. fact3: Something is Ibsenian if the fact that it does not convince mawkishness and is morbilliform is wrong. fact4: If the fact that that that that sweetbrier is both not a Cladonia and nonrepetitive is true is false is correct it pieces parasitemia. fact5: Some man is a Chippewaian if the fact that she/he is not a kind of a Triassic and does not execrate is false. fact6: If the Sporozoa does not derail Verbesina and she is not a kind of an allograph then she is not irreverent. fact7: If that sweetbrier is repetitive one that does not derail Verbesina then it is azotic. fact8: Somebody does upraise Arlington if the one is a kind of non-doctorial one that does not embellish rowdyism. fact9: If someone is a Tetragonia then it is a skiing. fact10: That plaid is a Hydrobates if that plaid is nonrepetitive. ; $hypothesis$ = If the fact that that sweetbrier is not nonrepetitive and does not derail Verbesina is wrong then it is azotic. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That sweatband is endoscopic.

{C}{a}

fact1: Something is multinomial if the fact that that thing is not multinomial and that thing is a Hebe does not hold. fact2: If something opens that thing is unsarcastic. fact3: The enophile is a kind of a nihil and the thing is unsarcastic. fact4: If the bloomers blushes then the bloomers is endoscopic. fact5: The fact that that islay is a kind of non-multinomial a Hebe does not hold if this toothbrush rockets Mimir. fact6: The fact that this toothbrush rockets Mimir and is a selfishness is correct if Kari does not hobnob. fact7: Kari rummages irresolution but it does not affix clustering. fact8: If the fact that that islay is multinomial is right then that sweatband is not mutational. fact9: This mire opens if something does not opens and is not mutational. fact10: That tibia is non-endoscopic if it is erythropoietic. fact11: If that sweatband is unsarcastic that person is endoscopic. fact12: That if the fact that this fascia does not open or it is not unequipped or both does not hold then that sweatband does not open is true. fact13: That sweatband is a kind of a Palaeolithic. fact14: That sweatband is a Fletcher if that is a transient. fact15: If Kari rummages irresolution and does not affix clustering Kari does not hobnob. fact16: If Vicki is a cleared it does open. fact17: Something is not mutational if it is not unequipped. fact18: The fact that that tibia is erythropoietic is right.

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

That sweatband is not endoscopic.

¬{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is multinomial if the fact that that thing is not multinomial and that thing is a Hebe does not hold. fact2: If something opens that thing is unsarcastic. fact3: The enophile is a kind of a nihil and the thing is unsarcastic. fact4: If the bloomers blushes then the bloomers is endoscopic. fact5: The fact that that islay is a kind of non-multinomial a Hebe does not hold if this toothbrush rockets Mimir. fact6: The fact that this toothbrush rockets Mimir and is a selfishness is correct if Kari does not hobnob. fact7: Kari rummages irresolution but it does not affix clustering. fact8: If the fact that that islay is multinomial is right then that sweatband is not mutational. fact9: This mire opens if something does not opens and is not mutational. fact10: That tibia is non-endoscopic if it is erythropoietic. fact11: If that sweatband is unsarcastic that person is endoscopic. fact12: That if the fact that this fascia does not open or it is not unequipped or both does not hold then that sweatband does not open is true. fact13: That sweatband is a kind of a Palaeolithic. fact14: That sweatband is a Fletcher if that is a transient. fact15: If Kari rummages irresolution and does not affix clustering Kari does not hobnob. fact16: If Vicki is a cleared it does open. fact17: Something is not mutational if it is not unequipped. fact18: The fact that that tibia is erythropoietic is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That sweatband is endoscopic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This absorbableness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That this Lotting Pluteaceae does not happens and that dilating nihility does not happens does not hold if that welling does not happens. fact2: The etiolation and that terming occurs. fact3: If that irritating countersignature occurs then that the nones does not happens and this lying Sagittariidae does not happens is right. fact4: That welling does not occurs if notthe hauling but this adrenergicness occurs. fact5: That leonineness happens if that this Lotting Pluteaceae does not occurs and that dilating nihility does not occurs is not correct. fact6: The seism occurs and that retiring happens. fact7: That irritating countersignature occurs if the fact that the fact that that intenseness does not occurs and that irritating countersignature does not happens is correct is incorrect. fact8: If that retiring and the etiolation occurs this absorbableness does not happens. fact9: That the etiolation but notthat terming occurs does not hold if that that thudding agoraphobia occurs is true. fact10: The fact that that intenseness does not happens and that irritating countersignature does not occurs is incorrect if that this renting chilblain does not occurs hold. fact11: If that retiring does not occurs then this absorbableness happens but the seism does not occurs. fact12: That the nones does not occurs and this lying Sagittariidae does not happens leads to that this interspersal does not occurs. fact13: Both that thudding agoraphobia and the facing malaria happens if that this interspersal does not occurs is right. fact14: If the fact that that leonineness occurs hold then this renting chilblain does not happens but this bestirring Rangoon happens.

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

This absorbableness occurs.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this Lotting Pluteaceae does not happens and that dilating nihility does not happens does not hold if that welling does not happens. fact2: The etiolation and that terming occurs. fact3: If that irritating countersignature occurs then that the nones does not happens and this lying Sagittariidae does not happens is right. fact4: That welling does not occurs if notthe hauling but this adrenergicness occurs. fact5: That leonineness happens if that this Lotting Pluteaceae does not occurs and that dilating nihility does not occurs is not correct. fact6: The seism occurs and that retiring happens. fact7: That irritating countersignature occurs if the fact that the fact that that intenseness does not occurs and that irritating countersignature does not happens is correct is incorrect. fact8: If that retiring and the etiolation occurs this absorbableness does not happens. fact9: That the etiolation but notthat terming occurs does not hold if that that thudding agoraphobia occurs is true. fact10: The fact that that intenseness does not happens and that irritating countersignature does not occurs is incorrect if that this renting chilblain does not occurs hold. fact11: If that retiring does not occurs then this absorbableness happens but the seism does not occurs. fact12: That the nones does not occurs and this lying Sagittariidae does not happens leads to that this interspersal does not occurs. fact13: Both that thudding agoraphobia and the facing malaria happens if that this interspersal does not occurs is right. fact14: If the fact that that leonineness occurs hold then this renting chilblain does not happens but this bestirring Rangoon happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This absorbableness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: That retiring happens.; fact2 -> int2: The etiolation occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that retiring and the etiolation occurs.; int3 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This nonperformance occurs.

{C}

fact1: If this Jobbing occurs this nonperformance does not occurs. fact2: That this mellowing Combretaceae and this bivalved occurs is brought about by that that avenue does not happens. fact3: The fact that either this decimalising Callisaurus or this non-sleevelessness or both happens is wrong. fact4: The fact that that sleevelessness happens is correct. fact5: This tuition does not happens. fact6: That Prakriticness is prevented by this mellowing Combretaceae. fact7: The demoralising Acanthocereus occurs. fact8: That this peal does not occurs yields that both this advantaging geomancy and that tanning hunger occurs. fact9: This nonperformance does not occurs if either this peaching Arianrhod happens or this Jobbing happens or both. fact10: That that avenue does not occurs and that rhythmicness does not occurs is caused by that that tanning hunger happens. fact11: The fact that that artefactualness happens and/or this Monitoring Eriophorum does not happens does not hold if this Jobbing does not occurs. fact12: This peal does not occurs if that indexing Acanthaceae happens. fact13: The fact that this nonperformance does not happens and this peaching Arianrhod does not happens does not hold if that Prakriticness occurs. fact14: If this bivalved does not happens that Prakriticness occurs and this mellowing Combretaceae happens. fact15: If that this nonperformance does not happens and this peaching Arianrhod does not happens does not hold then this Jobbing does not occurs. fact16: This nonperformance happens and this Jobbing does not happens if this peaching Arianrhod does not happens. fact17: This peaching Arianrhod occurs if that this decimalising Callisaurus occurs and/or that sleevelessness happens does not hold. fact18: That this alveolarness happens and/or this anadromousness happens prevents this pestling valetudinarianism. fact19: The fact that that artefactualness and this peaching Arianrhod occurs is false if that Prakriticness does not occurs. fact20: If the fact that the fact that either this decimalising Callisaurus happens or that sleevelessness does not occurs or both is correct does not hold this peaching Arianrhod happens. fact21: The colouring Marseillaise occurs.

fact1: {A} -> ¬{C} fact2: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact3: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact4: {AB} fact5: ¬{AJ} fact6: {F} -> ¬{E} fact7: {GB} fact8: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) fact9: ({B} v {A}) -> ¬{C} fact10: {J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} v ¬{EG}) fact12: {M} -> ¬{L} fact13: {E} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact14: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact15: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact16: ¬{B} -> ({C} & ¬{A}) fact17: ¬({AA} v {AB}) -> {B} fact18: ({DH} v {FU}) -> ¬{IU} fact19: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {B}) fact20: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact21: {CT}

This nonperformance occurs.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Jobbing occurs this nonperformance does not occurs. fact2: That this mellowing Combretaceae and this bivalved occurs is brought about by that that avenue does not happens. fact3: The fact that either this decimalising Callisaurus or this non-sleevelessness or both happens is wrong. fact4: The fact that that sleevelessness happens is correct. fact5: This tuition does not happens. fact6: That Prakriticness is prevented by this mellowing Combretaceae. fact7: The demoralising Acanthocereus occurs. fact8: That this peal does not occurs yields that both this advantaging geomancy and that tanning hunger occurs. fact9: This nonperformance does not occurs if either this peaching Arianrhod happens or this Jobbing happens or both. fact10: That that avenue does not occurs and that rhythmicness does not occurs is caused by that that tanning hunger happens. fact11: The fact that that artefactualness happens and/or this Monitoring Eriophorum does not happens does not hold if this Jobbing does not occurs. fact12: This peal does not occurs if that indexing Acanthaceae happens. fact13: The fact that this nonperformance does not happens and this peaching Arianrhod does not happens does not hold if that Prakriticness occurs. fact14: If this bivalved does not happens that Prakriticness occurs and this mellowing Combretaceae happens. fact15: If that this nonperformance does not happens and this peaching Arianrhod does not happens does not hold then this Jobbing does not occurs. fact16: This nonperformance happens and this Jobbing does not happens if this peaching Arianrhod does not happens. fact17: This peaching Arianrhod occurs if that this decimalising Callisaurus occurs and/or that sleevelessness happens does not hold. fact18: That this alveolarness happens and/or this anadromousness happens prevents this pestling valetudinarianism. fact19: The fact that that artefactualness and this peaching Arianrhod occurs is false if that Prakriticness does not occurs. fact20: If the fact that the fact that either this decimalising Callisaurus happens or that sleevelessness does not occurs or both is correct does not hold this peaching Arianrhod happens. fact21: The colouring Marseillaise occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This nonperformance occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact20 & fact3 -> int1: This peaching Arianrhod occurs.; int1 -> int2: Either this peaching Arianrhod occurs or this Jobbing happens or both.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This tripletail is a erg.

{C}{aa}

fact1: If that this needless is a Siamese and a readability does not hold this needless is not a kind of a Siamese. fact2: If some man is not a Siamese then that one rehearses greyed and is a kind of a Phlebodium. fact3: If this needless does not limp Actitis then the fact that this one is a kind of a Siamese and is a kind of a readability does not hold. fact4: Something is a erg if it is not platyrrhinic. fact5: This tripletail is a kind of a Attila. fact6: Something is a Attila if it is not a erg. fact7: If the fact that the fact that that cloverleaf is not a Attila and this is not a erg hold does not hold then this latch is not platyrrhinic. fact8: If this huntress is not non-platyrrhinic then that that cloverleaf is a Attila but it is not a erg does not hold. fact9: That some person is platyrrhinic hold if it is not a Attila. fact10: That keystone does not resound rateables but it is a Attila. fact11: If something rehearses greyed the fact that that is both not a Attila and not a erg does not hold. fact12: Something is a Attila if it is not platyrrhinic. fact13: This tripletail is a kind of non-platyrrhinic thing that is a Attila. fact14: The taw is not platyrrhinic. fact15: The fact that this tripletail does not uncoil bilaterality and is a Attila hold. fact16: If this needless rehearses greyed then this huntress is platyrrhinic. fact17: If the fact that some person is a kind of a Siamese that is a readability is not true that person is not a kind of a Siamese. fact18: This tripletail is not a erg if the fact that that cloverleaf is a Attila but not a erg does not hold.

fact1: ¬({F}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{c} fact2: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) fact3: ¬{H}{c} -> ¬({F}{c} & {G}{c}) fact4: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact5: {A}{aa} fact6: (x): ¬{C}x -> {A}x fact7: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{is} fact8: {B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x fact10: (¬{DO}{af} & {A}{af}) fact11: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x fact13: (¬{B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact14: ¬{B}{cu} fact15: (¬{DD}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact16: {D}{c} -> {B}{b} fact17: (x): ¬({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x fact18: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{aa}

This latch is not platyrrhinic.

¬{B}{is}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this needless is a Siamese and a readability does not hold this needless is not a kind of a Siamese. fact2: If some man is not a Siamese then that one rehearses greyed and is a kind of a Phlebodium. fact3: If this needless does not limp Actitis then the fact that this one is a kind of a Siamese and is a kind of a readability does not hold. fact4: Something is a erg if it is not platyrrhinic. fact5: This tripletail is a kind of a Attila. fact6: Something is a Attila if it is not a erg. fact7: If the fact that the fact that that cloverleaf is not a Attila and this is not a erg hold does not hold then this latch is not platyrrhinic. fact8: If this huntress is not non-platyrrhinic then that that cloverleaf is a Attila but it is not a erg does not hold. fact9: That some person is platyrrhinic hold if it is not a Attila. fact10: That keystone does not resound rateables but it is a Attila. fact11: If something rehearses greyed the fact that that is both not a Attila and not a erg does not hold. fact12: Something is a Attila if it is not platyrrhinic. fact13: This tripletail is a kind of non-platyrrhinic thing that is a Attila. fact14: The taw is not platyrrhinic. fact15: The fact that this tripletail does not uncoil bilaterality and is a Attila hold. fact16: If this needless rehearses greyed then this huntress is platyrrhinic. fact17: If the fact that some person is a kind of a Siamese that is a readability is not true that person is not a kind of a Siamese. fact18: This tripletail is not a erg if the fact that that cloverleaf is a Attila but not a erg does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This tripletail is a erg. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: If this tripletail is not platyrrhinic then this tripletail is a erg.; fact13 -> int2: This tripletail is not platyrrhinic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Either this honking or that orthopedicalness or both happens.

({D} v {C})

fact1: That the restoration happens is caused by that the empathizing Estonia happens. fact2: That randomisation occurs. fact3: This tweaking occurs. fact4: That this honking happens and/or that orthopedicalness occurs is wrong if that randomisation does not happens. fact5: If that confectionery happens the repeatableness happens. fact6: This honking does not happens if the fact that this honking and this carnivorousness occurs does not hold. fact7: This non-orthopedicalness is prevented by this agnizing triumvirate. fact8: The omnivorousness occurs. fact9: That randomisation and this agnizing triumvirate occurs. fact10: This interspersion happens and that specialization occurs. fact11: That the Arabian occurs is brought about by that that pushing occurs. fact12: The naturalization occurs and that boycotting occurs. fact13: If this carnivorousness happens then that randomisation does not occurs but this agnizing triumvirate happens. fact14: The foxhunting occurs. fact15: That pleomorphicness occurs.

fact1: {CD} -> {AL} fact2: {A} fact3: {IM} fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} v {C}) fact5: {GH} -> {IA} fact6: ¬({D} & {E}) -> ¬{D} fact7: {B} -> {C} fact8: {CC} fact9: ({A} & {B}) fact10: ({JJ} & {GT}) fact11: {AH} -> {IG} fact12: ({IE} & {FP}) fact13: {E} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact14: {ED} fact15: {DG}

That wiving happens and that percolation occurs.

({HR} & {CE})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the restoration happens is caused by that the empathizing Estonia happens. fact2: That randomisation occurs. fact3: This tweaking occurs. fact4: That this honking happens and/or that orthopedicalness occurs is wrong if that randomisation does not happens. fact5: If that confectionery happens the repeatableness happens. fact6: This honking does not happens if the fact that this honking and this carnivorousness occurs does not hold. fact7: This non-orthopedicalness is prevented by this agnizing triumvirate. fact8: The omnivorousness occurs. fact9: That randomisation and this agnizing triumvirate occurs. fact10: This interspersion happens and that specialization occurs. fact11: That the Arabian occurs is brought about by that that pushing occurs. fact12: The naturalization occurs and that boycotting occurs. fact13: If this carnivorousness happens then that randomisation does not occurs but this agnizing triumvirate happens. fact14: The foxhunting occurs. fact15: That pleomorphicness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this honking or that orthopedicalness or both happens. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: This agnizing triumvirate happens.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: That orthopedicalness happens.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This intermolecularness does not occurs and that orchiopexy does not occurs.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That Marching fingermark does not happens if the fact that the fact that that Marching fingermark happens but the atypicalness does not occurs is wrong hold. fact2: If the fact that this monishing Sandburg occurs but that marbleiseding does not happens is wrong then that energeticness occurs. fact3: The fact that this monishing Sandburg happens and that marbleiseding does not occurs does not hold if that Marching fingermark does not occurs. fact4: This intermolecularness does not occurs and that orchiopexy does not occurs. fact5: That clinch does not occurs and that alphabeticness does not happens if that energeticness happens. fact6: That orchiopexy does not happens.

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

That clinch does not occurs and that alphabeticness does not happens.

(¬{B} & ¬{IN})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Marching fingermark does not happens if the fact that the fact that that Marching fingermark happens but the atypicalness does not occurs is wrong hold. fact2: If the fact that this monishing Sandburg occurs but that marbleiseding does not happens is wrong then that energeticness occurs. fact3: The fact that this monishing Sandburg happens and that marbleiseding does not occurs does not hold if that Marching fingermark does not occurs. fact4: This intermolecularness does not occurs and that orchiopexy does not occurs. fact5: That clinch does not occurs and that alphabeticness does not happens if that energeticness happens. fact6: That orchiopexy does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This intermolecularness does not occurs and that orchiopexy does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Village is a timidity.

{B}{b}

fact1: That Village is a kind of a timidity if this subshrub is an alertness. fact2: The fact that this subshrub is not a extrados and not an alertness does not hold. fact3: Somebody that is not a nice is a timidity and is felicitous. fact4: If this subshrub is not a loading but this is a timidity then that Village is not a timidity. fact5: This subshrub is a mantiger if that cheerer is a mantiger. fact6: This subshrub is a extrados if that that Village is not a kind of an alertness and it is not a timidity does not hold. fact7: If something is a Chalcididae and a mantiger that is not a nice. fact8: If that Village is a Rynchops this vein is a Chalcididae. fact9: If something is a kind of a timidity but that thing is not a kind of a loading that thing is a extrados. fact10: That Village is a Rynchops and/or is a Chalcididae. fact11: This vein is a Chalcididae if that Village is a Chalcididae. fact12: If this subshrub is a kind of a mantiger then this vein is a mantiger.

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

This vein is a kind of a extrados.

{AA}{r}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Village is a kind of a timidity if this subshrub is an alertness. fact2: The fact that this subshrub is not a extrados and not an alertness does not hold. fact3: Somebody that is not a nice is a timidity and is felicitous. fact4: If this subshrub is not a loading but this is a timidity then that Village is not a timidity. fact5: This subshrub is a mantiger if that cheerer is a mantiger. fact6: This subshrub is a extrados if that that Village is not a kind of an alertness and it is not a timidity does not hold. fact7: If something is a Chalcididae and a mantiger that is not a nice. fact8: If that Village is a Rynchops this vein is a Chalcididae. fact9: If something is a kind of a timidity but that thing is not a kind of a loading that thing is a extrados. fact10: That Village is a Rynchops and/or is a Chalcididae. fact11: This vein is a Chalcididae if that Village is a Chalcididae. fact12: If this subshrub is a kind of a mantiger then this vein is a mantiger. ; $hypothesis$ = That Village is a timidity. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Kuroshio occurs and that patristicness occurs.

({B} & {C})

fact1: That Kuroshio occurs if that scalage happens. fact2: Both that patristicness and this perviousness happens.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Kuroshio occurs if that scalage happens. fact2: Both that patristicness and this perviousness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That Kuroshio occurs and that patristicness occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This contadino is not a kind of a palaeolithic.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: This contadino is a cupid and euphemises if this contadino is not a kind of a ulema. fact2: This contadino is not a kind of a palaeolithic if that thortveitite does not euphemise and is a kind of a palaeolithic. fact3: Something does not euphemise and is a palaeolithic if it is not a kind of a cupid. fact4: If something euphemises this is a kind of a Ulex. fact5: That whirligig is not Calcuttan. fact6: That pycnogonid is not a palaeolithic. fact7: If that this contadino is not a cornered hold then that whirligig is a kind of non-Calcuttan one that weds Mennonitism. fact8: If that whirligig is not Calcuttan then this contadino does not wed Mennonitism and is a cornered. fact9: If that whirligig is not Calcuttan that this contadino is a kind of a cornered hold. fact10: If this contadino is not a palaeolithic then that whirligig is a kind of a Ulex or is Calcuttan or both. fact11: Someone is not a Haggard but the one weds Mennonitism if the one is Calcuttan. fact12: Someone is not a kind of a palaeolithic if it is Calcuttan. fact13: This contadino is a kind of a palaeolithic if this contadino does not wed Mennonitism and is a kind of a cornered. fact14: This contadino is a cornered.

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

That future is not a Haggard but she weds Mennonitism.

(¬{CA}{cq} & {AA}{cq})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This contadino is a cupid and euphemises if this contadino is not a kind of a ulema. fact2: This contadino is not a kind of a palaeolithic if that thortveitite does not euphemise and is a kind of a palaeolithic. fact3: Something does not euphemise and is a palaeolithic if it is not a kind of a cupid. fact4: If something euphemises this is a kind of a Ulex. fact5: That whirligig is not Calcuttan. fact6: That pycnogonid is not a palaeolithic. fact7: If that this contadino is not a cornered hold then that whirligig is a kind of non-Calcuttan one that weds Mennonitism. fact8: If that whirligig is not Calcuttan then this contadino does not wed Mennonitism and is a cornered. fact9: If that whirligig is not Calcuttan that this contadino is a kind of a cornered hold. fact10: If this contadino is not a palaeolithic then that whirligig is a kind of a Ulex or is Calcuttan or both. fact11: Someone is not a Haggard but the one weds Mennonitism if the one is Calcuttan. fact12: Someone is not a kind of a palaeolithic if it is Calcuttan. fact13: This contadino is a kind of a palaeolithic if this contadino does not wed Mennonitism and is a kind of a cornered. fact14: This contadino is a cornered. ; $hypothesis$ = This contadino is not a kind of a palaeolithic. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact5 -> int1: This contadino does not wed Mennonitism but it is a kind of a cornered.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This yarn is not a Verdi.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: This Nazification is a Verdi and/or a Chilomeniscus if this fancywork is not acneiform. fact2: That this griffon does not leave psychopharmacology is true. fact3: This yarn is a Verdi if this Nazification is acneiform. fact4: The wacko is a Verdi. fact5: Either something is not a balagan or it is not acneiform or both if it sparks Wilde. fact6: This yarn does not jingle Krakau but it leaves psychopharmacology. fact7: If this griffon is non-acneiform one that leaves psychopharmacology the fact that this Nazification is a fiduciary hold. fact8: This yarn is not a kind of a Verdi if this griffon is a Verdi. fact9: This Nazification is a kind of a Chilomeniscus if this griffon does not leave psychopharmacology but it is a fiduciary. fact10: If the fact that this yarn is acneiform is true then this Nazification is a kind of a Verdi. fact11: This yarn is not a pressed and is a Chilomeniscus. fact12: This yarn is acneiform. fact13: This Nazification is a kind of a Chilomeniscus if this griffon leaves psychopharmacology and this person is a kind of a fiduciary. fact14: If some person is a Chilomeniscus it is acneiform. fact15: If some person is not cytoarchitectonic then it sparks Wilde. fact16: This Nazification is a fiduciary. fact17: This handbarrow leaves psychopharmacology. fact18: If some man is not cytoarchitectonic then this fedelline counterweights gusto and is not cytoarchitectonic. fact19: This yarn is a Verdi if that that person is a fiduciary is right. fact20: This griffon does not leave psychopharmacology and is a kind of a fiduciary. fact21: The sobersides is acneiform. fact22: This Nazification leaves psychopharmacology. fact23: The psilocin is not cytoarchitectonic.

fact1: ¬{A}{d} -> ({C}{b} v {B}{b}) fact2: ¬{AA}{a} fact3: {A}{b} -> {C}{c} fact4: {C}{hg} fact5: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x v ¬{A}x) fact6: (¬{EI}{c} & {AA}{c}) fact7: (¬{A}{a} & {AA}{a}) -> {AB}{b} fact8: {C}{a} -> ¬{C}{c} fact9: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact10: {A}{c} -> {C}{b} fact11: (¬{CL}{c} & {B}{c}) fact12: {A}{c} fact13: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact14: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact15: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}x fact16: {AB}{b} fact17: {AA}{i} fact18: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({G}{e} & ¬{F}{e}) fact19: {AB}{c} -> {C}{c} fact20: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact21: {A}{cd} fact22: {AA}{b} fact23: ¬{F}{f}

This yarn is not a Verdi.

¬{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Nazification is a Verdi and/or a Chilomeniscus if this fancywork is not acneiform. fact2: That this griffon does not leave psychopharmacology is true. fact3: This yarn is a Verdi if this Nazification is acneiform. fact4: The wacko is a Verdi. fact5: Either something is not a balagan or it is not acneiform or both if it sparks Wilde. fact6: This yarn does not jingle Krakau but it leaves psychopharmacology. fact7: If this griffon is non-acneiform one that leaves psychopharmacology the fact that this Nazification is a fiduciary hold. fact8: This yarn is not a kind of a Verdi if this griffon is a Verdi. fact9: This Nazification is a kind of a Chilomeniscus if this griffon does not leave psychopharmacology but it is a fiduciary. fact10: If the fact that this yarn is acneiform is true then this Nazification is a kind of a Verdi. fact11: This yarn is not a pressed and is a Chilomeniscus. fact12: This yarn is acneiform. fact13: This Nazification is a kind of a Chilomeniscus if this griffon leaves psychopharmacology and this person is a kind of a fiduciary. fact14: If some person is a Chilomeniscus it is acneiform. fact15: If some person is not cytoarchitectonic then it sparks Wilde. fact16: This Nazification is a fiduciary. fact17: This handbarrow leaves psychopharmacology. fact18: If some man is not cytoarchitectonic then this fedelline counterweights gusto and is not cytoarchitectonic. fact19: This yarn is a Verdi if that that person is a fiduciary is right. fact20: This griffon does not leave psychopharmacology and is a kind of a fiduciary. fact21: The sobersides is acneiform. fact22: This Nazification leaves psychopharmacology. fact23: The psilocin is not cytoarchitectonic. ; $hypothesis$ = This yarn is not a Verdi. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact20 -> int1: This Nazification is a Chilomeniscus.; fact14 -> int2: The fact that this Nazification is acneiform is right if this Nazification is a kind of a Chilomeniscus.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This Nazification is acneiform.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cobble does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: This neuropsychiatricness does not occurs. fact2: This protozoicness does not occurs. fact3: The fact that this nonaccomplishment does not occurs is true. fact4: That stranding topognosia does not occurs. fact5: That quietening does not happens. fact6: The towing cogitation does not happens. fact7: This pranking does not occurs. fact8: That cobble does not occurs. fact9: The luginging does not happens. fact10: The perplexing Estonia does not occurs. fact11: The gunfire does not occurs. fact12: This knitting gummosis does not occurs. fact13: The ottoman does not happens. fact14: That that homicide does not occurs results in that that cobble but notthe rehearsal occurs.

fact1: ¬{FK} fact2: ¬{IU} fact3: ¬{GL} fact4: ¬{DM} fact5: ¬{IG} fact6: ¬{DD} fact7: ¬{E} fact8: ¬{A} fact9: ¬{BR} fact10: ¬{BK} fact11: ¬{DG} fact12: ¬{EL} fact13: ¬{CB} fact14: ¬{B} -> ({A} & ¬{HI})

The rehearsal does not happens.

¬{HI}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This neuropsychiatricness does not occurs. fact2: This protozoicness does not occurs. fact3: The fact that this nonaccomplishment does not occurs is true. fact4: That stranding topognosia does not occurs. fact5: That quietening does not happens. fact6: The towing cogitation does not happens. fact7: This pranking does not occurs. fact8: That cobble does not occurs. fact9: The luginging does not happens. fact10: The perplexing Estonia does not occurs. fact11: The gunfire does not occurs. fact12: This knitting gummosis does not occurs. fact13: The ottoman does not happens. fact14: That that homicide does not occurs results in that that cobble but notthe rehearsal occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That cobble does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Nebuchadnezzar is a picovolt but it does not bet Trypetidae.

({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: If that millet does not bet Trypetidae then that Nebuchadnezzar is a kind of a picovolt. fact2: If the fact that something stitches salary but it is not tubeless does not hold that it is not a kind of a Alhambra is correct. fact3: Something that does not bewitch dispensability does not bet Trypetidae. fact4: Some person does not bet Trypetidae if that it does bewitch dispensability and it is not a MBD is incorrect. fact5: This Iberian is not a Ki. fact6: If some person is a Ki then that the fact that she is a kind of a picovolt and she does not bet Trypetidae hold is wrong. fact7: That millet is both downstairs and not a Yuan. fact8: That Nebuchadnezzar inhabits fauvism and is not nonindustrial. fact9: That Nebuchadnezzar is a kind of a picovolt. fact10: That Nebuchadnezzar is not a kind of a Q and does not licence Phyllium if this Iberian is foetal. fact11: If that that something does bet Trypetidae but it is not a picovolt is correct is not right then it is not a MBD. fact12: The fact that that millet bewitches dispensability and is not a MBD is false if this Iberian is not a Ki. fact13: If that millet does not bet Trypetidae then that Nebuchadnezzar is a picovolt and does not bet Trypetidae. fact14: If something is not a Q then it is a Ki and is a decaliter.

fact1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{a} fact2: (x): ¬({HK}x & ¬{DM}x) -> ¬{HI}x fact3: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x fact4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: ¬{A}{b} fact6: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact7: ({FE}{aa} & ¬{P}{aa}) fact8: ({GD}{a} & ¬{JC}{a}) fact9: {C}{a} fact10: {G}{b} -> (¬{E}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) fact11: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact12: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact13: ¬{B}{aa} -> ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact14: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {D}x)

The fact that that Nebuchadnezzar is a picovolt and does not bet Trypetidae is incorrect.

¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that millet does not bet Trypetidae then that Nebuchadnezzar is a kind of a picovolt. fact2: If the fact that something stitches salary but it is not tubeless does not hold that it is not a kind of a Alhambra is correct. fact3: Something that does not bewitch dispensability does not bet Trypetidae. fact4: Some person does not bet Trypetidae if that it does bewitch dispensability and it is not a MBD is incorrect. fact5: This Iberian is not a Ki. fact6: If some person is a Ki then that the fact that she is a kind of a picovolt and she does not bet Trypetidae hold is wrong. fact7: That millet is both downstairs and not a Yuan. fact8: That Nebuchadnezzar inhabits fauvism and is not nonindustrial. fact9: That Nebuchadnezzar is a kind of a picovolt. fact10: That Nebuchadnezzar is not a kind of a Q and does not licence Phyllium if this Iberian is foetal. fact11: If that that something does bet Trypetidae but it is not a picovolt is correct is not right then it is not a MBD. fact12: The fact that that millet bewitches dispensability and is not a MBD is false if this Iberian is not a Ki. fact13: If that millet does not bet Trypetidae then that Nebuchadnezzar is a picovolt and does not bet Trypetidae. fact14: If something is not a Q then it is a Ki and is a decaliter. ; $hypothesis$ = That Nebuchadnezzar is a picovolt but it does not bet Trypetidae. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: If the fact that that millet bewitches dispensability but it is not a MBD is false that millet does not bet Trypetidae.; fact5 & fact12 -> int2: The fact that that millet does bewitch dispensability but it is not a MBD is not true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That millet does not bet Trypetidae.; int3 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is something such that if this thing is not a whimper then this thing is not a lithomancy and reconciles is incorrect.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

fact1: There is someone such that if it does not figure ADHD it is autocatalytic.

fact1: (Ex): ¬{JK}x -> {FS}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is someone such that if it does not figure ADHD it is autocatalytic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is something such that if this thing is not a whimper then this thing is not a lithomancy and reconciles is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this shielding tailors titter hold.

{D}{d}

fact1: This walkway is not carroty. fact2: If that shotgun is carroty and tailors titter then this shielding does not tailors titter. fact3: If Mariela is not non-carroty this veronal is hungry. fact4: That shotgun is not a Namtar. fact5: If the fact that either this veronal is a Campylorhynchus or it is not a AMusD or both does not hold then Mariela is not a kind of a AMusD. fact6: If this veronal is not non-hungry then this shielding tailors titter. fact7: Either Mariela is a Kolami or that person is a kind of a strike or both if that person is not a AMusD. fact8: This veronal is a kind of a cardinal. fact9: This shielding is not carroty. fact10: If the fact that something is hungry hold the fact that this is carroty hold. fact11: The fact that this veronal is a kind of a ketonemia hold. fact12: This veronal is a Namtar. fact13: Mariela is not a codon. fact14: This veronal tailors titter. fact15: If this veronal is a cardinal the fact that it is a Campylorhynchus and/or is not a kind of a AMusD is wrong. fact16: If that shotgun is not a Namtar then Mariela is carroty. fact17: Something is a Namtar if it is carroty.

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

This shielding does not tailor titter.

¬{D}{d}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This walkway is not carroty. fact2: If that shotgun is carroty and tailors titter then this shielding does not tailors titter. fact3: If Mariela is not non-carroty this veronal is hungry. fact4: That shotgun is not a Namtar. fact5: If the fact that either this veronal is a Campylorhynchus or it is not a AMusD or both does not hold then Mariela is not a kind of a AMusD. fact6: If this veronal is not non-hungry then this shielding tailors titter. fact7: Either Mariela is a Kolami or that person is a kind of a strike or both if that person is not a AMusD. fact8: This veronal is a kind of a cardinal. fact9: This shielding is not carroty. fact10: If the fact that something is hungry hold the fact that this is carroty hold. fact11: The fact that this veronal is a kind of a ketonemia hold. fact12: This veronal is a Namtar. fact13: Mariela is not a codon. fact14: This veronal tailors titter. fact15: If this veronal is a cardinal the fact that it is a Campylorhynchus and/or is not a kind of a AMusD is wrong. fact16: If that shotgun is not a Namtar then Mariela is carroty. fact17: Something is a Namtar if it is carroty. ; $hypothesis$ = That this shielding tailors titter hold. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact4 -> int1: Mariela is carroty.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This veronal is not non-hungry.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This heating is Kantian.

{C}{c}

fact1: Something that censors 24 is Kantian. fact2: That lascar purchases Tinbergen if the fact that that one is a kind of a expansiveness is not incorrect. fact3: That lascar punctures Luftwaffe. fact4: This dewlap is Kantian. fact5: If Breanna environs Motacilla and is not unready this heating censors 24. fact6: If that lascar purchases Tinbergen then that that lascar does not constipate Scardinius and is not Kantian does not hold. fact7: That lascar environs Motacilla. fact8: Breanna is not unready. fact9: Something is not Kantian if that it seeds nephrology hold. fact10: Breanna environs Motacilla but this one is not unready if that lascar does not seed nephrology. fact11: That lascar is not unready. fact12: that this nephrology does not seed lascar is true. fact13: Breanna is not Kantian.

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

This heating is not Kantian.

¬{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that censors 24 is Kantian. fact2: That lascar purchases Tinbergen if the fact that that one is a kind of a expansiveness is not incorrect. fact3: That lascar punctures Luftwaffe. fact4: This dewlap is Kantian. fact5: If Breanna environs Motacilla and is not unready this heating censors 24. fact6: If that lascar purchases Tinbergen then that that lascar does not constipate Scardinius and is not Kantian does not hold. fact7: That lascar environs Motacilla. fact8: Breanna is not unready. fact9: Something is not Kantian if that it seeds nephrology hold. fact10: Breanna environs Motacilla but this one is not unready if that lascar does not seed nephrology. fact11: That lascar is not unready. fact12: that this nephrology does not seed lascar is true. fact13: Breanna is not Kantian. ; $hypothesis$ = This heating is Kantian. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This rijstaffel is not a Diderot.

¬{E}{b}

fact1: If some person is not a kind of a Naja then she/he is a Diderot and is a Kinshasa. fact2: Something that is a kind of a Italian is not a Brummell and not a fixings. fact3: If this troubleshooter is a Zeppelin this rijstaffel is a Diderot. fact4: If this troubleshooter does not confine that is a Italian and that retracts alluring. fact5: This troubleshooter does not correct graveness. fact6: If this troubleshooter is enzymatic this troubleshooter is not a Diderot. fact7: If this troubleshooter is a Kinshasa this rijstaffel is a Diderot. fact8: Some person exports tetartanopia and is a Zoroastrian if she/he does not commix might. fact9: This rijstaffel is a rebuke and/or a Kinshasa. fact10: The lutanist is a Diderot. fact11: This dimity is either aqueous or a Zeppelin or both. fact12: That either this troubleshooter is a Zeppelin or it is a Kinshasa or both hold if that this troubleshooter does not commix might hold. fact13: Something is not a Zeppelin and does not commix might if it is a Kinshasa. fact14: This troubleshooter does not confine. fact15: This rijstaffel is not a Kinshasa. fact16: The fact that this rijstaffel is a Kinshasa is right if this troubleshooter is a Diderot. fact17: That Briana does prepare and it is not non-identical does not hold if this troubleshooter is not a kind of a Brummell. fact18: This troubleshooter is a kind of a Zoroastrian. fact19: If that something does not commix might but that thing is a Diderot does not hold then the fact that that thing is not a Diderot is true. fact20: If that someone does prepare and is identical is wrong then he/she is not a Naja. fact21: If this rijstaffel is a Zeppelin this troubleshooter is a Diderot. fact22: This rijstaffel is a Diderot and/or it is a Zeppelin if the fact that this rijstaffel does not commix might is not incorrect.

fact1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) fact2: (x): {K}x -> (¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) fact3: {C}{a} -> {E}{b} fact4: ¬{M}{a} -> ({K}{a} & {L}{a}) fact5: ¬{FT}{a} fact6: {HS}{a} -> ¬{E}{a} fact7: {D}{a} -> {E}{b} fact8: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({JA}x & {A}x) fact9: ({FC}{b} v {D}{b}) fact10: {E}{dj} fact11: ({HO}{dn} v {C}{dn}) fact12: ¬{B}{a} -> ({C}{a} v {D}{a}) fact13: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact14: ¬{M}{a} fact15: ¬{D}{b} fact16: {E}{a} -> {D}{b} fact17: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬({H}{ip} & {G}{ip}) fact18: {A}{a} fact19: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x fact20: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x fact21: {C}{b} -> {E}{a} fact22: ¬{B}{b} -> ({E}{b} v {C}{b})

This rijstaffel is not a Diderot.

¬{E}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is not a kind of a Naja then she/he is a Diderot and is a Kinshasa. fact2: Something that is a kind of a Italian is not a Brummell and not a fixings. fact3: If this troubleshooter is a Zeppelin this rijstaffel is a Diderot. fact4: If this troubleshooter does not confine that is a Italian and that retracts alluring. fact5: This troubleshooter does not correct graveness. fact6: If this troubleshooter is enzymatic this troubleshooter is not a Diderot. fact7: If this troubleshooter is a Kinshasa this rijstaffel is a Diderot. fact8: Some person exports tetartanopia and is a Zoroastrian if she/he does not commix might. fact9: This rijstaffel is a rebuke and/or a Kinshasa. fact10: The lutanist is a Diderot. fact11: This dimity is either aqueous or a Zeppelin or both. fact12: That either this troubleshooter is a Zeppelin or it is a Kinshasa or both hold if that this troubleshooter does not commix might hold. fact13: Something is not a Zeppelin and does not commix might if it is a Kinshasa. fact14: This troubleshooter does not confine. fact15: This rijstaffel is not a Kinshasa. fact16: The fact that this rijstaffel is a Kinshasa is right if this troubleshooter is a Diderot. fact17: That Briana does prepare and it is not non-identical does not hold if this troubleshooter is not a kind of a Brummell. fact18: This troubleshooter is a kind of a Zoroastrian. fact19: If that something does not commix might but that thing is a Diderot does not hold then the fact that that thing is not a Diderot is true. fact20: If that someone does prepare and is identical is wrong then he/she is not a Naja. fact21: If this rijstaffel is a Zeppelin this troubleshooter is a Diderot. fact22: This rijstaffel is a Diderot and/or it is a Zeppelin if the fact that this rijstaffel does not commix might is not incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This rijstaffel is not a Diderot. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That jitter happens and this splicing Dharma occurs.

({C} & {A})

fact1: That jitter and that slicing occurs. fact2: This splicing Dharma and that choking occurs. fact3: If that choking does not occurs then both this hurrying and this splicing Dharma happens.

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

This hurrying happens.

{FK}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That jitter and that slicing occurs. fact2: This splicing Dharma and that choking occurs. fact3: If that choking does not occurs then both this hurrying and this splicing Dharma happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That jitter happens and this splicing Dharma occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This splicing Dharma occurs.; fact1 -> int2: That that jitter occurs hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The australopithecineness does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: This chaffiness occurs. fact2: That GHRF happens. fact3: The australopithecineness happens.

fact1: {IS} fact2: {BB} fact3: {A}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This chaffiness occurs. fact2: That GHRF happens. fact3: The australopithecineness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The australopithecineness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Everything mummifies calyx.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Something is not a softheartedness but this thing is a kind of a Cordaitales if this thing is not a Trogium. fact2: Everything mummifies calyx. fact3: Something that is either not a Trogium or not a beaming or both is not a Trogium. fact4: Everyone does not kid unfaithfulness. fact5: If some man is not a softheartedness but that one is a Cordaitales that one does not blacken millisecond. fact6: Everything is receptive. fact7: Someone is a kind of a Rhincodontidae if that she/he mummifies calyx is correct. fact8: If something is not capitular then it does not blacken millisecond. fact9: Something is not a Trogium and/or the thing is not a beaming if the thing does not kid unfaithfulness. fact10: Something is not capitular if it is a Cordaitales and a softheartedness. fact11: Everything is a Thunnus. fact12: If some person does not blacken millisecond then the fact that she does not mummify calyx and she is not capitular does not hold. fact13: Everything is a carom.

fact1: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & {E}x) fact2: (x): {A}x fact3: (x): (¬{F}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact4: (x): ¬{G}x fact5: (x): (¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact6: (x): {AP}x fact7: (x): {A}x -> {BR}x fact8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}x fact9: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x v ¬{H}x) fact10: (x): ({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact11: (x): {JB}x fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) fact13: (x): {DH}x

Every man dapples Malebranche.

(x): {FM}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not a softheartedness but this thing is a kind of a Cordaitales if this thing is not a Trogium. fact2: Everything mummifies calyx. fact3: Something that is either not a Trogium or not a beaming or both is not a Trogium. fact4: Everyone does not kid unfaithfulness. fact5: If some man is not a softheartedness but that one is a Cordaitales that one does not blacken millisecond. fact6: Everything is receptive. fact7: Someone is a kind of a Rhincodontidae if that she/he mummifies calyx is correct. fact8: If something is not capitular then it does not blacken millisecond. fact9: Something is not a Trogium and/or the thing is not a beaming if the thing does not kid unfaithfulness. fact10: Something is not capitular if it is a Cordaitales and a softheartedness. fact11: Everything is a Thunnus. fact12: If some person does not blacken millisecond then the fact that she does not mummify calyx and she is not capitular does not hold. fact13: Everything is a carom. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything mummifies calyx. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This bog shepherdesses Choloepus and it does gall Thailand.

({B}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: If this bog is a Channukah this bog shepherdesses Choloepus. fact2: This bog is a Channukah. fact3: This bog is not a caduceus and/or is a Paramaribo. fact4: That bantam is a kind of a Channukah. fact5: This bog does not shepherdess Choloepus and/or he is heterological. fact6: The fact that this bog is economic hold. fact7: This bog galls Thailand if either this one is not a caduceus or this one is a Paramaribo or both.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: (¬{D}{a} v {E}{a}) fact4: {A}{df} fact5: (¬{B}{a} v {AP}{a}) fact6: {IA}{a} fact7: (¬{D}{a} v {E}{a}) -> {C}{a}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this bog is a Channukah this bog shepherdesses Choloepus. fact2: This bog is a Channukah. fact3: This bog is not a caduceus and/or is a Paramaribo. fact4: That bantam is a kind of a Channukah. fact5: This bog does not shepherdess Choloepus and/or he is heterological. fact6: The fact that this bog is economic hold. fact7: This bog galls Thailand if either this one is not a caduceus or this one is a Paramaribo or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This bog shepherdesses Choloepus and it does gall Thailand. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> int1: This bog does shepherdess Choloepus.; fact7 & fact3 -> int2: This bog galls Thailand.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This adenohypophysis is a Becquerel.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Some man that is Zolaesque and is Brobdingnagian is not a Becquerel. fact2: This adenohypophysis is not Zolaesque and it is non-Brobdingnagian. fact3: That Tadzhik is not non-Brobdingnagian. fact4: That Tadzhik is a driblet if it is Brobdingnagian. fact5: Some man is not non-herbivorous if it antiquates. fact6: That some person is not a driblet but it nitrifies friendship does not hold if it is non-Zolaesque. fact7: Something is a Becquerel if that the fact that it is not a driblet and nitrifies friendship hold does not hold.

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

This adenohypophysis is not a Becquerel.

¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man that is Zolaesque and is Brobdingnagian is not a Becquerel. fact2: This adenohypophysis is not Zolaesque and it is non-Brobdingnagian. fact3: That Tadzhik is not non-Brobdingnagian. fact4: That Tadzhik is a driblet if it is Brobdingnagian. fact5: Some man is not non-herbivorous if it antiquates. fact6: That some person is not a driblet but it nitrifies friendship does not hold if it is non-Zolaesque. fact7: Something is a Becquerel if that the fact that it is not a driblet and nitrifies friendship hold does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This adenohypophysis is a Becquerel. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: The fact that the fact that this adenohypophysis is not a driblet and does nitrify friendship is true is false if it is not Zolaesque.; fact2 -> int2: This adenohypophysis is not Zolaesque.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that that this adenohypophysis is not a kind of a driblet but it nitrifies friendship does not hold is true.; fact7 -> int4: If the fact that this adenohypophysis is not a driblet and nitrifies friendship is false it is a Becquerel.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This aging Malacopterygii does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: That shambolicness occurs. fact2: That that centrosomicness does not happens is triggered by that the attraction and this mastership happens. fact3: This neuter occurs. fact4: If that centrosomicness does not occurs then the Bayessing does not happens and that samiel does not happens. fact5: If that institutionalness happens then this scourging formication occurs. fact6: If that samiel does not happens this scourging formication occurs and this untying droop does not happens. fact7: That institutionalness and this neuter happens. fact8: The fact that the vivisection occurs is true if that overlooking Zoarcidae happens. fact9: That this aging Malacopterygii occurs and this neuter happens is incorrect if that institutionalness does not happens. fact10: This aging Malacopterygii does not occurs if the fact that both this aging Malacopterygii and this neuter occurs does not hold. fact11: That this untying droop happens results in that that twinning Tarantino but notthis scourging formication happens.

fact1: {HJ} fact2: ({I} & {J}) -> ¬{H} fact3: {B} fact4: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) fact5: {A} -> {C} fact6: ¬{F} -> ({C} & ¬{E}) fact7: ({A} & {B}) fact8: {JH} -> {JJ} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & {B}) fact10: ¬({D} & {B}) -> ¬{D} fact11: {E} -> ({IK} & ¬{C})

That unfastening happens and that twinning Tarantino happens.

({AM} & {IK})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That shambolicness occurs. fact2: That that centrosomicness does not happens is triggered by that the attraction and this mastership happens. fact3: This neuter occurs. fact4: If that centrosomicness does not occurs then the Bayessing does not happens and that samiel does not happens. fact5: If that institutionalness happens then this scourging formication occurs. fact6: If that samiel does not happens this scourging formication occurs and this untying droop does not happens. fact7: That institutionalness and this neuter happens. fact8: The fact that the vivisection occurs is true if that overlooking Zoarcidae happens. fact9: That this aging Malacopterygii occurs and this neuter happens is incorrect if that institutionalness does not happens. fact10: This aging Malacopterygii does not occurs if the fact that both this aging Malacopterygii and this neuter occurs does not hold. fact11: That this untying droop happens results in that that twinning Tarantino but notthis scourging formication happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This aging Malacopterygii does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that this trolleybus is a Triakidae but it is not acceptable is not true is not wrong.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: If there is something such that this is a wilt this end is unacceptable. fact2: This spitter is not imperishable but that one organises impartiality. fact3: If that some man either is acceptable or does not market tightfistedness or both does not hold then it is a Triakidae. fact4: This trolleybus does not organise impartiality if the fact that this spitter does not struggle Steatornithidae but it organise impartiality is not true. fact5: The fact that that Iraki is acceptable and/or this thing does not market tightfistedness does not hold if this trolleybus does benight Dagestani. fact6: This end unstraineds Fatihah and/or it is not a kind of a wilt. fact7: If the fact that something is not a kind of a wilt hold that does not unstrained Fatihah. fact8: If that Iraki is not a Triakidae this trolleybus is not acceptable. fact9: If that Iraki is not a Triakidae the fact that this trolleybus is a Triakidae and is not acceptable is true. fact10: There is something such that the thing unstraineds Fatihah and/or the thing is a wilt. fact11: If this spitter is not imperishable then that that Iraki markets tightfistedness and benights Dagestani is false. fact12: If there exists somebody such that it unstraineds Fatihah and/or is not a wilt then that Iraki is not a Triakidae. fact13: Someone is adient but that person does not unstrained Fatihah if that person is a wilt. fact14: This trolleybus is not acceptable. fact15: If the fact that something is a Triakidae is true then that thing is a wilt. fact16: If this trolleybus does not organise impartiality then this trolleybus is not perishable and the thing benights Dagestani.

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

That Iraki is adient but it does not unstrained Fatihah.

({EI}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If there is something such that this is a wilt this end is unacceptable. fact2: This spitter is not imperishable but that one organises impartiality. fact3: If that some man either is acceptable or does not market tightfistedness or both does not hold then it is a Triakidae. fact4: This trolleybus does not organise impartiality if the fact that this spitter does not struggle Steatornithidae but it organise impartiality is not true. fact5: The fact that that Iraki is acceptable and/or this thing does not market tightfistedness does not hold if this trolleybus does benight Dagestani. fact6: This end unstraineds Fatihah and/or it is not a kind of a wilt. fact7: If the fact that something is not a kind of a wilt hold that does not unstrained Fatihah. fact8: If that Iraki is not a Triakidae this trolleybus is not acceptable. fact9: If that Iraki is not a Triakidae the fact that this trolleybus is a Triakidae and is not acceptable is true. fact10: There is something such that the thing unstraineds Fatihah and/or the thing is a wilt. fact11: If this spitter is not imperishable then that that Iraki markets tightfistedness and benights Dagestani is false. fact12: If there exists somebody such that it unstraineds Fatihah and/or is not a wilt then that Iraki is not a Triakidae. fact13: Someone is adient but that person does not unstrained Fatihah if that person is a wilt. fact14: This trolleybus is not acceptable. fact15: If the fact that something is a Triakidae is true then that thing is a wilt. fact16: If this trolleybus does not organise impartiality then this trolleybus is not perishable and the thing benights Dagestani. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that this trolleybus is a Triakidae but it is not acceptable is not true is not wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: There is something such that that unstraineds Fatihah and/or that is not a kind of a wilt.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That Iraki is not a Triakidae.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That australopithecine is irrational.

{A}{a}

fact1: That australopithecine is irrational. fact2: That someone does not dimensioning krone and is not irrational is wrong if it is a Salvelinus. fact3: If the fact that some man is irrational and is not a Salvelinus is false then it is not irrational. fact4: Something is irrational if that the fact that that thing does not dimensioning krone and that thing is irrational is true is false.

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

That australopithecine is not irrational.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That australopithecine is irrational. fact2: That someone does not dimensioning krone and is not irrational is wrong if it is a Salvelinus. fact3: If the fact that some man is irrational and is not a Salvelinus is false then it is not irrational. fact4: Something is irrational if that the fact that that thing does not dimensioning krone and that thing is irrational is true is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That australopithecine is irrational. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This mesentery is a kinematics.

{C}{aa}

fact1: This mesentery does not fling. fact2: That trackball is a plenty. fact3: If someone is a plenty the person is not a kinematics. fact4: This mesentery is a plenty and the thing is a Rakaposhi. fact5: If this snowdrop is a kinematics then the fact that this snowdrop is not a gallimaufry is right. fact6: This volume is not a kinematics. fact7: Something is not a Akaba if it intrigues.

fact1: ¬{JI}{aa} fact2: {A}{gb} fact3: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x fact4: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact5: {C}{ca} -> ¬{AQ}{ca} fact6: ¬{C}{dn} fact7: (x): {K}x -> ¬{FP}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This mesentery does not fling. fact2: That trackball is a plenty. fact3: If someone is a plenty the person is not a kinematics. fact4: This mesentery is a plenty and the thing is a Rakaposhi. fact5: If this snowdrop is a kinematics then the fact that this snowdrop is not a gallimaufry is right. fact6: This volume is not a kinematics. fact7: Something is not a Akaba if it intrigues. ; $hypothesis$ = This mesentery is a kinematics. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This mesentery is not a kinematics if that this mesentery is not a plenty is wrong.; fact4 -> int2: This mesentery is a plenty.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This whortleberry is not a pronunciamento.

¬{D}{c}

fact1: If that NGF is not a kind of a MFLOP and/or it is not a malignment it reinsures paraphrenia. fact2: If that NGF reinsures paraphrenia then that decadent is not reentrant but it is a kind of a Chaeronea. fact3: This whortleberry does not reinsure paraphrenia. fact4: That NGF is not a kind of a MFLOP and/or it is not a malignment. fact5: This whortleberry is not a pronunciamento if that decadent is a kind of non-reentrant one that is a Chaeronea.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that NGF is not a kind of a MFLOP and/or it is not a malignment it reinsures paraphrenia. fact2: If that NGF reinsures paraphrenia then that decadent is not reentrant but it is a kind of a Chaeronea. fact3: This whortleberry does not reinsure paraphrenia. fact4: That NGF is not a kind of a MFLOP and/or it is not a malignment. fact5: This whortleberry is not a pronunciamento if that decadent is a kind of non-reentrant one that is a Chaeronea. ; $hypothesis$ = This whortleberry is not a pronunciamento. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact4 -> int1: That NGF reinsures paraphrenia.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That decadent is non-reentrant but it is a Chaeronea.; int2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that Delawarean prohibits asperity and/or this person does recover scrip does not hold.

¬({AA}{a} v {B}{a})

fact1: Something that surroundingses Magnificat or is uncastrated or both does not prohibit asperity. fact2: That Delawarean is not non-strategic if this is not uncastrated. fact3: That Delawarean is strategic. fact4: If that Delawarean is not uncastrated then it prohibits asperity and is strategic. fact5: That Delawarean is not uncastrated.

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

The fact that that Delawarean prohibits asperity and/or this person does recover scrip does not hold.

¬({AA}{a} v {B}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that surroundingses Magnificat or is uncastrated or both does not prohibit asperity. fact2: That Delawarean is not non-strategic if this is not uncastrated. fact3: That Delawarean is strategic. fact4: If that Delawarean is not uncastrated then it prohibits asperity and is strategic. fact5: That Delawarean is not uncastrated. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that Delawarean prohibits asperity and/or this person does recover scrip does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact5 -> int1: That Delawarean prohibits asperity and is strategic.; int1 -> int2: That Delawarean prohibits asperity.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This GHQ clubs fame.

{B}{a}

fact1: If some man is a kind of a Manichean then he is not an academic. fact2: This GHQ is a Manichean if that this diacetylmorphine either does not club fame or is not a kind of a Manichean or both is incorrect. fact3: The fact that this Photostat is a kind of a Manichean is right if this GHQ is a Manichean. fact4: That starlet is anatomic and it is a kind of a defect if this toxicognath does not monish indemnity. fact5: If Kiana is a crashing the forsythia is blastemic. fact6: If something that is dramaturgic is a kind of a defect it is not a Selaginella. fact7: This toxicognath does not monish indemnity if that that filature is either not divisional or not headless or both is false. fact8: If that starlet is a defect then this diacetylmorphine is both non-dramaturgic and not a Selaginella. fact9: The fact that that filature is not divisional or the one is not headless or both does not hold if the forsythia is blastemic. fact10: This diacetylmorphine is a defect if that that thing is anatomic is not wrong. fact11: The fact that that starlet is not blastemic hold. fact12: If the fact that something is divisional and/or does not monish indemnity is wrong this thing is dramaturgic. fact13: If either this GHQ is not a midnight or she is not aerodynamic or both then this GHQ clubs fame. fact14: If the fact that that starlet is not blastemic is not incorrect then that either this diacetylmorphine is divisional or it does not monish indemnity or both does not hold. fact15: Everyone is anatomic and it is headless. fact16: If something is not a Selaginella then that it does not club fame and/or is not a Manichean is wrong.

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

This GHQ does not club fame.

¬{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some man is a kind of a Manichean then he is not an academic. fact2: This GHQ is a Manichean if that this diacetylmorphine either does not club fame or is not a kind of a Manichean or both is incorrect. fact3: The fact that this Photostat is a kind of a Manichean is right if this GHQ is a Manichean. fact4: That starlet is anatomic and it is a kind of a defect if this toxicognath does not monish indemnity. fact5: If Kiana is a crashing the forsythia is blastemic. fact6: If something that is dramaturgic is a kind of a defect it is not a Selaginella. fact7: This toxicognath does not monish indemnity if that that filature is either not divisional or not headless or both is false. fact8: If that starlet is a defect then this diacetylmorphine is both non-dramaturgic and not a Selaginella. fact9: The fact that that filature is not divisional or the one is not headless or both does not hold if the forsythia is blastemic. fact10: This diacetylmorphine is a defect if that that thing is anatomic is not wrong. fact11: The fact that that starlet is not blastemic hold. fact12: If the fact that something is divisional and/or does not monish indemnity is wrong this thing is dramaturgic. fact13: If either this GHQ is not a midnight or she is not aerodynamic or both then this GHQ clubs fame. fact14: If the fact that that starlet is not blastemic is not incorrect then that either this diacetylmorphine is divisional or it does not monish indemnity or both does not hold. fact15: Everyone is anatomic and it is headless. fact16: If something is not a Selaginella then that it does not club fame and/or is not a Manichean is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This GHQ clubs fame. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This thermosphere is not a kind of an ennui.

¬{D}{a}

fact1: Some person that is not a bay is a kind of an ennui that does eviscerate Papeete. fact2: This Tractarian is a bay. fact3: This thermosphere is a bay. fact4: This Tractarian is Masonic. fact5: The cotton is Donnean and it eviscerates Papeete. fact6: If this Tractarian is an ennui this thermosphere is a kind of an ennui. fact7: Some man is not an ennui if she eviscerates Papeete and she is not non-Masonic. fact8: If something that is a kind of an idler is a skim then it does not dulcify. fact9: That this thermosphere eviscerates Papeete and is a kind of a bay hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) fact2: {B}{b} fact3: {B}{a} fact4: {C}{b} fact5: ({DG}{bb} & {A}{bb}) fact6: {D}{b} -> {D}{a} fact7: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact8: (x): ({AN}x & {BI}x) -> ¬{GT}x fact9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

This thermosphere is a kind of an ennui.

{D}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person that is not a bay is a kind of an ennui that does eviscerate Papeete. fact2: This Tractarian is a bay. fact3: This thermosphere is a bay. fact4: This Tractarian is Masonic. fact5: The cotton is Donnean and it eviscerates Papeete. fact6: If this Tractarian is an ennui this thermosphere is a kind of an ennui. fact7: Some man is not an ennui if she eviscerates Papeete and she is not non-Masonic. fact8: If something that is a kind of an idler is a skim then it does not dulcify. fact9: That this thermosphere eviscerates Papeete and is a kind of a bay hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This thermosphere is not a kind of an ennui. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__