Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

That this incurable is both creaseproof and a conservative is false.

¬({B}{a} & {A}{a})

fact1: If some man is not a stiff then that it is creaseproof and is a kind of a conservative is incorrect. fact2: That if that sundew is a pogey that do notgmatise then that this Cyclopes is not a pogey hold hold. fact3: If that something is not a Henson and dogmatises is incorrect it is a Henson. fact4: The fact that this incurable extirpates adventurism but that one is not autologous is wrong. fact5: This incurable is creaseproof if that it does not extirpate adventurism and is non-autologous does not hold. fact6: This wit is a kind of a pogey. fact7: Some person that is a kind of a Henson is a dubiousness and does not propel haggling. fact8: This incurable is creaseproof if she/he extirpates adventurism. fact9: This incurable is a stiff and is a conservative. fact10: That something is not a Henson but the thing dogmatises is wrong if the thing is a kind of a pogey. fact11: Somebody is a stiff and is a conservative if that she/he is not creaseproof is not wrong. fact12: This incurable is a stiff. fact13: This Cyclopes propels haggling and is a Henson if this is not a kind of a pogey. fact14: If that sundew is sublunary that sundew is a pogey but it do notgmatise. fact15: Somebody that is a kind of a dubiousness and does not propel haggling is not creaseproof.

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

This wit is a stiff.

{C}{ga}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If some man is not a stiff then that it is creaseproof and is a kind of a conservative is incorrect. fact2: That if that sundew is a pogey that do notgmatise then that this Cyclopes is not a pogey hold hold. fact3: If that something is not a Henson and dogmatises is incorrect it is a Henson. fact4: The fact that this incurable extirpates adventurism but that one is not autologous is wrong. fact5: This incurable is creaseproof if that it does not extirpate adventurism and is non-autologous does not hold. fact6: This wit is a kind of a pogey. fact7: Some person that is a kind of a Henson is a dubiousness and does not propel haggling. fact8: This incurable is creaseproof if she/he extirpates adventurism. fact9: This incurable is a stiff and is a conservative. fact10: That something is not a Henson but the thing dogmatises is wrong if the thing is a kind of a pogey. fact11: Somebody is a stiff and is a conservative if that she/he is not creaseproof is not wrong. fact12: This incurable is a stiff. fact13: This Cyclopes propels haggling and is a Henson if this is not a kind of a pogey. fact14: If that sundew is sublunary that sundew is a pogey but it do notgmatise. fact15: Somebody that is a kind of a dubiousness and does not propel haggling is not creaseproof. ; $hypothesis$ = That this incurable is both creaseproof and a conservative is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That transparency happens and this values does not happens.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That this clanger does not occurs yields that that atonalness and that arbitrement occurs. fact2: That that bidirectionalness but notthis sexualising redefinition occurs does not hold if that atonalness happens. fact3: That this matchup happens and this forefending Dagon does not happens is brought about by that non-heterologousness. fact4: If this counterespionage does not happens this crosstalk does not occurs and that clangour does not happens. fact5: If that clangour does not occurs then that this counterespionage does not occurs and this crosstalk happens is false. fact6: That transparency occurs and this values does not happens if this heterologousness happens. fact7: If that choragicness does not happens notthis clanger but the abstract occurs. fact8: If this crosstalk does not occurs then this heterologousness does not happens and the erotica does not occurs. fact9: That this indenting flakiness but notthe hammering Conium happens leads to that that choragicness does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that that bidirectionalness happens but this sexualising redefinition does not occurs is not correct then this counterespionage does not happens. fact11: That that that transparency but notthis values happens is true does not hold if this heterologousness does not happens. fact12: That this heterologousness occurs brings about that this values does not occurs. fact13: The fact that the bootlegging but notthe unequivocalness occurs hold. fact14: If this bisteredness occurs then the proness and that non-Palladianness occurs. fact15: This values does not happens.

fact1: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact2: {H} -> ¬({F} & ¬{G}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ({AS} & ¬{HI}) fact4: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact5: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{E} & {C}) fact6: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact7: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) fact8: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact9: ({N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} fact10: ¬({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact12: {A} -> ¬{AB} fact13: ({IB} & ¬{EL}) fact14: {IE} -> ({IL} & ¬{IP}) fact15: ¬{AB}

The fact that that transparency but notthis values happens does not hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this clanger does not occurs yields that that atonalness and that arbitrement occurs. fact2: That that bidirectionalness but notthis sexualising redefinition occurs does not hold if that atonalness happens. fact3: That this matchup happens and this forefending Dagon does not happens is brought about by that non-heterologousness. fact4: If this counterespionage does not happens this crosstalk does not occurs and that clangour does not happens. fact5: If that clangour does not occurs then that this counterespionage does not occurs and this crosstalk happens is false. fact6: That transparency occurs and this values does not happens if this heterologousness happens. fact7: If that choragicness does not happens notthis clanger but the abstract occurs. fact8: If this crosstalk does not occurs then this heterologousness does not happens and the erotica does not occurs. fact9: That this indenting flakiness but notthe hammering Conium happens leads to that that choragicness does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that that bidirectionalness happens but this sexualising redefinition does not occurs is not correct then this counterespionage does not happens. fact11: That that that transparency but notthis values happens is true does not hold if this heterologousness does not happens. fact12: That this heterologousness occurs brings about that this values does not occurs. fact13: The fact that the bootlegging but notthe unequivocalness occurs hold. fact14: If this bisteredness occurs then the proness and that non-Palladianness occurs. fact15: This values does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That transparency happens and this values does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This Coue does not speed vertigo and is not nonrigid.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: This bit is not equatorial. fact2: There is no man that does not speed vertigo and is not rigid. fact3: The fact that this Coue does not speed vertigo and is nonrigid is false. fact4: If that that bucket is not a wring hold then the fact that that cromorne is a selenology and it is a Gram is false. fact5: If that dowdy is an argot that is anemometric then that bucket is not a wring. fact6: Someone that is not a kind of a timorousness is a kind of a brinkmanship that is a kind of a adiposity. fact7: Some man that is a brinkmanship does not speed vertigo and is not nonrigid. fact8: If the fact that something is a selenology and the thing is a Gram is incorrect the fact that the thing is not a Parulidae hold. fact9: There is no person such that it does speed vertigo and is not nonrigid. fact10: That this Coue speeds vertigo but that is not nonrigid is wrong. fact11: This Coue is not a timorousness if that that cromorne is a hitting that holystones Drymoglossum is incorrect. fact12: That dowdy is a kind of an argot. fact13: The fact that something is a hitting and it does holystone Drymoglossum is false if it is not a Parulidae. fact14: That some person does not speed vertigo and it does not filet Puccinia does not hold if it is a brinkmanship. fact15: If this bit is non-equatorial thing that is anemometric that dowdy is anemometric.

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

The fact that this Coue does not speed vertigo and the thing does not filet Puccinia is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{DG}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This bit is not equatorial. fact2: There is no man that does not speed vertigo and is not rigid. fact3: The fact that this Coue does not speed vertigo and is nonrigid is false. fact4: If that that bucket is not a wring hold then the fact that that cromorne is a selenology and it is a Gram is false. fact5: If that dowdy is an argot that is anemometric then that bucket is not a wring. fact6: Someone that is not a kind of a timorousness is a kind of a brinkmanship that is a kind of a adiposity. fact7: Some man that is a brinkmanship does not speed vertigo and is not nonrigid. fact8: If the fact that something is a selenology and the thing is a Gram is incorrect the fact that the thing is not a Parulidae hold. fact9: There is no person such that it does speed vertigo and is not nonrigid. fact10: That this Coue speeds vertigo but that is not nonrigid is wrong. fact11: This Coue is not a timorousness if that that cromorne is a hitting that holystones Drymoglossum is incorrect. fact12: That dowdy is a kind of an argot. fact13: The fact that something is a hitting and it does holystone Drymoglossum is false if it is not a Parulidae. fact14: That some person does not speed vertigo and it does not filet Puccinia does not hold if it is a brinkmanship. fact15: If this bit is non-equatorial thing that is anemometric that dowdy is anemometric. ; $hypothesis$ = This Coue does not speed vertigo and is not nonrigid. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that propagandising does not happens but this paramedicalness happens is false.

¬(¬{D} & {C})

fact1: The fact that the obligating but notthe connivance occurs does not hold. fact2: If the dredging determinism occurs notthat propagandising but this paramedicalness happens. fact3: The ordinance occurs if that that defloration occurs but the heckling maliciousness does not happens is wrong. fact4: If that this wiping sureness happens and that picket does not occurs is incorrect then that the beano happens hold. fact5: The fact that this wiping sureness happens but that picket does not occurs does not hold. fact6: If the onsideness happens the fact that the troll occurs is true. fact7: If the beano occurs then the dredging determinism happens.

fact1: ¬({CL} & ¬{IM}) fact2: {A} -> (¬{D} & {C}) fact3: ¬({R} & ¬{AT}) -> {CJ} fact4: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact5: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact6: {ED} -> {IU} fact7: {B} -> {A}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the obligating but notthe connivance occurs does not hold. fact2: If the dredging determinism occurs notthat propagandising but this paramedicalness happens. fact3: The ordinance occurs if that that defloration occurs but the heckling maliciousness does not happens is wrong. fact4: If that this wiping sureness happens and that picket does not occurs is incorrect then that the beano happens hold. fact5: The fact that this wiping sureness happens but that picket does not occurs does not hold. fact6: If the onsideness happens the fact that the troll occurs is true. fact7: If the beano occurs then the dredging determinism happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that propagandising does not happens but this paramedicalness happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact5 -> int1: The beano occurs.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: The dredging determinism happens.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This hemorrhagicness happens.

{C}

fact1: If this honoring does not occurs but this pushup happens then that this hemorrhagicness occurs is true. fact2: If the fact that both that malodourousness and that codding cajolery occurs does not hold then that malodourousness does not happens. fact3: That that fixing does not occurs hold. fact4: That notthe basting but the Republican happens triggers that that fernlessness happens. fact5: That the driving does not happens is prevented by that that accusing does not occurs. fact6: This honoring does not happens if that this honoring happens and this swilling does not occurs does not hold. fact7: This papistness does not occurs if that malodourousness does not happens. fact8: That this pushup happens results in that notthis honoring but this pushup happens. fact9: This honoring occurs if that this honoring does not happens and this papistness occurs does not hold. fact10: The fact that this honoring but notthis swilling occurs is wrong if this papistness does not occurs. fact11: That this pushup does not occurs but that fixing happens prevents that this hemorrhagicness occurs. fact12: This pushup is triggered by that that fixing does not happens.

fact1: (¬{D} & {B}) -> {C} fact2: ¬({G} & {H}) -> ¬{G} fact3: ¬{A} fact4: (¬{EQ} & {FU}) -> {GO} fact5: ¬{IF} -> {EI} fact6: ¬({D} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact7: ¬{G} -> ¬{E} fact8: {B} -> (¬{D} & {B}) fact9: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> {D} fact10: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & ¬{F}) fact11: (¬{B} & {A}) -> ¬{C} fact12: ¬{A} -> {B}

This hemorrhagicness does not happens.

¬{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this honoring does not occurs but this pushup happens then that this hemorrhagicness occurs is true. fact2: If the fact that both that malodourousness and that codding cajolery occurs does not hold then that malodourousness does not happens. fact3: That that fixing does not occurs hold. fact4: That notthe basting but the Republican happens triggers that that fernlessness happens. fact5: That the driving does not happens is prevented by that that accusing does not occurs. fact6: This honoring does not happens if that this honoring happens and this swilling does not occurs does not hold. fact7: This papistness does not occurs if that malodourousness does not happens. fact8: That this pushup happens results in that notthis honoring but this pushup happens. fact9: This honoring occurs if that this honoring does not happens and this papistness occurs does not hold. fact10: The fact that this honoring but notthis swilling occurs is wrong if this papistness does not occurs. fact11: That this pushup does not occurs but that fixing happens prevents that this hemorrhagicness occurs. fact12: This pushup is triggered by that that fixing does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This hemorrhagicness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact3 -> int1: This pushup occurs.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: This honoring does not occurs but this pushup occurs.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this sepulchre is not a Appalachian but an amount is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: The outrigger does not cozen ridiculousness but it is a Appalachian if the fact that it is not a milepost is right. fact2: Somebody is not a kind of a Camponotus if the fact that that it is a Camponotus and a clink is right is false. fact3: The fact that the layby is not unmanful is not wrong if this thing is not a Best. fact4: This sepulchre is not a milepost if this sepulchre does not cozen ridiculousness. fact5: This sepulchre is not a novelette but dendritic. fact6: The daylight is not an amount. fact7: The Mercer is not a kind of an amount. fact8: If this sepulchre is not a kind of a inexactness it is not a Appalachian. fact9: The fact that the Mercer is not a Appalachian is true. fact10: If this sepulchre is not a obtuseness then it is not a Ithaca. fact11: This sepulchre is not a Ithaca and is illegal. fact12: This sepulchre is not a Ptilocrinus but this thing is an amount. fact13: If this sepulchre is not rupicolous the person does not harry Dasypus and is a novelette. fact14: This sepulchre is not a 17 if this sepulchre is not a decisiveness. fact15: That minivan is not an amount but this is an octillion. fact16: If this sepulchre is not a Camponotus this sepulchre is an amount. fact17: This sepulchre is not a Camponotus. fact18: The efflorescence is not an amount but it is a kind of a Czerny. fact19: This sepulchre is not unoiled but he is ferny if he does not disgust.

fact1: ¬{JD}{hl} -> (¬{GB}{hl} & {AA}{hl}) fact2: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact3: ¬{AS}{aa} -> ¬{BC}{aa} fact4: ¬{GB}{a} -> ¬{JD}{a} fact5: (¬{IN}{a} & {DL}{a}) fact6: ¬{AB}{ia} fact7: ¬{AB}{gq} fact8: ¬{IO}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact9: ¬{AA}{gq} fact10: ¬{DS}{a} -> ¬{FL}{a} fact11: (¬{FL}{a} & {ED}{a}) fact12: (¬{CK}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact13: ¬{AK}{a} -> (¬{DU}{a} & {IN}{a}) fact14: ¬{CB}{a} -> ¬{FA}{a} fact15: (¬{AB}{dc} & {AO}{dc}) fact16: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{a} fact17: ¬{A}{a} fact18: (¬{AB}{di} & {FJ}{di}) fact19: ¬{CJ}{a} -> (¬{FU}{a} & {BR}{a})

The fact that this sepulchre is not a Appalachian but an amount is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The outrigger does not cozen ridiculousness but it is a Appalachian if the fact that it is not a milepost is right. fact2: Somebody is not a kind of a Camponotus if the fact that that it is a Camponotus and a clink is right is false. fact3: The fact that the layby is not unmanful is not wrong if this thing is not a Best. fact4: This sepulchre is not a milepost if this sepulchre does not cozen ridiculousness. fact5: This sepulchre is not a novelette but dendritic. fact6: The daylight is not an amount. fact7: The Mercer is not a kind of an amount. fact8: If this sepulchre is not a kind of a inexactness it is not a Appalachian. fact9: The fact that the Mercer is not a Appalachian is true. fact10: If this sepulchre is not a obtuseness then it is not a Ithaca. fact11: This sepulchre is not a Ithaca and is illegal. fact12: This sepulchre is not a Ptilocrinus but this thing is an amount. fact13: If this sepulchre is not rupicolous the person does not harry Dasypus and is a novelette. fact14: This sepulchre is not a 17 if this sepulchre is not a decisiveness. fact15: That minivan is not an amount but this is an octillion. fact16: If this sepulchre is not a Camponotus this sepulchre is an amount. fact17: This sepulchre is not a Camponotus. fact18: The efflorescence is not an amount but it is a kind of a Czerny. fact19: This sepulchre is not unoiled but he is ferny if he does not disgust. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this sepulchre is not a Appalachian but an amount is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That rafter protects Sakti.

{B}{a}

fact1: If that rafter is unbanded thing that spumes Cavia then that rafter does protect Sakti. fact2: If something that is unbanded does not spume Cavia then it protects Sakti. fact3: If that rafter is not a Trinidadian then that rafter does not spume Cavia. fact4: If something is both not unshapely and a Eriocaulaceae then that is not porphyritic. fact5: If that rafter is a Trinidadian but that thing is not a Mantegna that that thing is a Genetta hold. fact6: That someone is not a corinthian and acquits Eglevsky does not hold if that person is non-porphyritic. fact7: That rafter does not decrease. fact8: That somebody is not unshapely but it is a Eriocaulaceae if that somebody does not rasp Juvenal. fact9: Some man protects Sakti if the person is unbanded and the person spumes Cavia. fact10: If this Rush is a Elgar that penicillamine aids disyllable. fact11: That rafter is unbanded but that does not spume Cavia if that is not a Trinidadian. fact12: If the fact that some man does not forgo euro and it is non-material is incorrect it does not rasp Juvenal. fact13: That thresher is not unbanded. fact14: That MN does not spume Cavia. fact15: That rafter is not non-hieroglyphical but it does not slosh. fact16: If that penicillamine aids disyllable Darwin does not protect Sakti and/or is a Trinidadian. fact17: That rafter is not a Trinidadian. fact18: The fact that that somebody does not forgo euro and is not material is not true. fact19: That rafter does not spume Cavia. fact20: That if that seta is not a kind of a corinthian then the fact that that seta is microeconomic and that is a kind of a Elgar is correct is true. fact21: If the fact that that somebody is not a corinthian and acquits Eglevsky does not hold that seta is not a corinthian. fact22: If Darwin does not protect Sakti or is a Trinidadian or both then that rafter does not protect Sakti. fact23: This Rush rasps Juvenal but this is not unshapely.

fact1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} fact4: (x): (¬{J}x & {K}x) -> ¬{I}x fact5: ({A}{a} & ¬{GS}{a}) -> {HT}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) fact7: ¬{IK}{a} fact8: ¬{L}{f} -> (¬{J}{f} & {K}{f}) fact9: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact10: {D}{d} -> {C}{c} fact11: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact12: (x): ¬(¬{M}x & ¬{N}x) -> ¬{L}x fact13: ¬{AA}{ak} fact14: ¬{AB}{ib} fact15: ({BC}{a} & ¬{GD}{a}) fact16: {C}{c} -> (¬{B}{b} v {A}{b}) fact17: ¬{A}{a} fact18: ¬(¬{M}{f} & ¬{N}{f}) fact19: ¬{AB}{a} fact20: ¬{G}{e} -> ({F}{e} & {D}{e}) fact21: ¬(¬{G}{f} & {H}{f}) -> ¬{G}{e} fact22: (¬{B}{b} v {A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact23: ({L}{d} & ¬{J}{d})

That rafter does not protect Sakti.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that rafter is unbanded thing that spumes Cavia then that rafter does protect Sakti. fact2: If something that is unbanded does not spume Cavia then it protects Sakti. fact3: If that rafter is not a Trinidadian then that rafter does not spume Cavia. fact4: If something is both not unshapely and a Eriocaulaceae then that is not porphyritic. fact5: If that rafter is a Trinidadian but that thing is not a Mantegna that that thing is a Genetta hold. fact6: That someone is not a corinthian and acquits Eglevsky does not hold if that person is non-porphyritic. fact7: That rafter does not decrease. fact8: That somebody is not unshapely but it is a Eriocaulaceae if that somebody does not rasp Juvenal. fact9: Some man protects Sakti if the person is unbanded and the person spumes Cavia. fact10: If this Rush is a Elgar that penicillamine aids disyllable. fact11: That rafter is unbanded but that does not spume Cavia if that is not a Trinidadian. fact12: If the fact that some man does not forgo euro and it is non-material is incorrect it does not rasp Juvenal. fact13: That thresher is not unbanded. fact14: That MN does not spume Cavia. fact15: That rafter is not non-hieroglyphical but it does not slosh. fact16: If that penicillamine aids disyllable Darwin does not protect Sakti and/or is a Trinidadian. fact17: That rafter is not a Trinidadian. fact18: The fact that that somebody does not forgo euro and is not material is not true. fact19: That rafter does not spume Cavia. fact20: That if that seta is not a kind of a corinthian then the fact that that seta is microeconomic and that is a kind of a Elgar is correct is true. fact21: If the fact that that somebody is not a corinthian and acquits Eglevsky does not hold that seta is not a corinthian. fact22: If Darwin does not protect Sakti or is a Trinidadian or both then that rafter does not protect Sakti. fact23: This Rush rasps Juvenal but this is not unshapely. ; $hypothesis$ = That rafter protects Sakti. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact17 -> int1: That rafter is not banded and does not spume Cavia.; fact2 -> int2: That rafter does protect Sakti if the one is unbanded and the one does not spume Cavia.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

There is somebody such that if that the person is pleasant one that does not petrify Tully does not hold then that the person is not a Curcuma is true.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

fact1: This Mansi is not a contrition if the fact that it is not a rabbit and it is not a kind of a Thornton is incorrect. fact2: There is something such that if it is unpleasant it is not a Curcuma. fact3: This bluestone is not a Curcuma if that this bluestone is not a net and nauseates is not right. fact4: If the fact that this bluestone is not unpleasant and does not petrify Tully is incorrect then this bluestone is not a kind of a Curcuma. fact5: There exists some man such that if the fact that that one does not chap antiestablishmentism and that one is not unessential does not hold that one is not a skydiving. fact6: There is some man such that if the fact that it does refocus crosshairs and it does not palpitate smidgin is incorrect then it is not papilliform.

fact1: ¬(¬{IC}{hb} & ¬{BU}{hb}) -> ¬{FD}{hb} fact2: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬(¬{GA}{aa} & {IN}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact5: (Ex): ¬(¬{EG}x & ¬{DK}x) -> ¬{BA}x fact6: (Ex): ¬({HO}x & ¬{FH}x) -> ¬{ED}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This Mansi is not a contrition if the fact that it is not a rabbit and it is not a kind of a Thornton is incorrect. fact2: There is something such that if it is unpleasant it is not a Curcuma. fact3: This bluestone is not a Curcuma if that this bluestone is not a net and nauseates is not right. fact4: If the fact that this bluestone is not unpleasant and does not petrify Tully is incorrect then this bluestone is not a kind of a Curcuma. fact5: There exists some man such that if the fact that that one does not chap antiestablishmentism and that one is not unessential does not hold that one is not a skydiving. fact6: There is some man such that if the fact that it does refocus crosshairs and it does not palpitate smidgin is incorrect then it is not papilliform. ; $hypothesis$ = There is somebody such that if that the person is pleasant one that does not petrify Tully does not hold then that the person is not a Curcuma is true. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That potation does not pair PRC but she/he patents HHS.

(¬{E}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: This markhor is a fatty. fact2: Some man satisfices lied and/or is a kind of a fatty if this one does not anguish. fact3: If a bibliophilic thing is not palatial then it does not tranquillising disguised. fact4: If something does not tranquillising disguised and is not palatial the fact that it does not anguish is right. fact5: That potation does not pair PRC. fact6: If Alexander is not a Cynoscion the thing does not patent HHS and the thing is saprobic. fact7: The fact that if some person does not tranquillising disguised that it does not patent HHS and/or pairs PRC is wrong is true. fact8: If that potation does not satisfice lied it does not pair PRC and does patent HHS. fact9: If some person that does not satisfice lied tranquillisings disguised this one does not anguish. fact10: If something is not clausal that is non-palatial. fact11: The fact that something does not pair PRC and does patent HHS does not hold if it is not a kind of a fatty. fact12: This markhor is bibliophilic. fact13: If this markhor is not a kind of a fatty and satisfices lied then that potation is not a fatty. fact14: If that potation pairs PRC and anguishes then this markhor does not patent HHS. fact15: If that this markhor is a fatty or satisfices lied or both is wrong the evaporometer is not a fatty. fact16: That potation does not pair PRC if that potation does not satisfice lied. fact17: Something does not anguish if that it does not patent HHS and/or does pair PRC is wrong. fact18: This markhor anguishes. fact19: If that potation is clausal and it is a kind of a supply this markhor is not clausal. fact20: That potation is a kind of a supply if that protozoan is an analogue. fact21: That potation is clausal.

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

That that potation does not pair PRC and patents HHS is wrong.

¬(¬{E}{b} & {D}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This markhor is a fatty. fact2: Some man satisfices lied and/or is a kind of a fatty if this one does not anguish. fact3: If a bibliophilic thing is not palatial then it does not tranquillising disguised. fact4: If something does not tranquillising disguised and is not palatial the fact that it does not anguish is right. fact5: That potation does not pair PRC. fact6: If Alexander is not a Cynoscion the thing does not patent HHS and the thing is saprobic. fact7: The fact that if some person does not tranquillising disguised that it does not patent HHS and/or pairs PRC is wrong is true. fact8: If that potation does not satisfice lied it does not pair PRC and does patent HHS. fact9: If some person that does not satisfice lied tranquillisings disguised this one does not anguish. fact10: If something is not clausal that is non-palatial. fact11: The fact that something does not pair PRC and does patent HHS does not hold if it is not a kind of a fatty. fact12: This markhor is bibliophilic. fact13: If this markhor is not a kind of a fatty and satisfices lied then that potation is not a fatty. fact14: If that potation pairs PRC and anguishes then this markhor does not patent HHS. fact15: If that this markhor is a fatty or satisfices lied or both is wrong the evaporometer is not a fatty. fact16: That potation does not pair PRC if that potation does not satisfice lied. fact17: Something does not anguish if that it does not patent HHS and/or does pair PRC is wrong. fact18: This markhor anguishes. fact19: If that potation is clausal and it is a kind of a supply this markhor is not clausal. fact20: That potation is a kind of a supply if that protozoan is an analogue. fact21: That potation is clausal. ; $hypothesis$ = That potation does not pair PRC but she/he patents HHS. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That two does not bite Penelope.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That two thatches CST and it is a Hirudinidae. fact2: This flyover is a Veronese and it is a kind of a peck if this flyover is not leguminous. fact3: If that that buffoon does not paneled q is correct then that two bites Penelope and layers. fact4: That buffoon bites Penelope and it is a sideropenia. fact5: The fact that that neuron does not paneled q is correct if something that paneled q is a defectiveness. fact6: That buffoon bites Penelope if this enterolith layers. fact7: That two is a kind of a tableau and is adventuresome. fact8: If that two does bite Penelope and layers that cowherb does not bite Penelope. fact9: If there is something such that that this thing is a kind of a Hirudinidae that does thatch CST does not hold then that buffoon does not thatch CST. fact10: There is something such that it paneleds q and is a defectiveness. fact11: That two minces and it layers. fact12: Someone is not a kind of a Priestley if the person portions Cumberland. fact13: That that coltsfoot is a Hirudinidae and thatches CST is incorrect if that neuron does not paneled q. fact14: This enterolith is a kind of a peck. fact15: The fact that that buffoon vulcanises if that that buffoon is a defectiveness is correct is correct. fact16: That buffoon is a peck if this enterolith is a peck. fact17: That two does not bite Penelope if that two owes Micromeria. fact18: That two is a kind of a exceedance that smoothens Hymenophyllaceae. fact19: This enterolith layers and does not vulcanise if this flyover is a peck. fact20: A peck that vulcanises does not paneled q. fact21: Some man that thatches CST does not bite Penelope. fact22: That two is a Hirudinidae.

fact1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: ¬{J}{f} -> ({I}{f} & {G}{f}) fact3: ¬{E}{b} -> ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) fact4: ({C}{b} & {GQ}{b}) fact5: (x): ({E}x & {H}x) -> ¬{E}{e} fact6: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} fact7: ({EF}{a} & {GS}{a}) fact8: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ac} fact9: (x): ¬({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}{b} fact10: (Ex): ({E}x & {H}x) fact11: ({FF}{a} & {D}{a}) fact12: (x): {CH}x -> ¬{P}x fact13: ¬{E}{e} -> ¬({B}{d} & {A}{d}) fact14: {G}{c} fact15: {H}{b} -> {F}{b} fact16: {G}{c} -> {G}{b} fact17: {BM}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} fact18: ({DQ}{a} & {GT}{a}) fact19: {G}{f} -> ({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact20: (x): ({G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{E}x fact21: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x fact22: {B}{a}

That two bites Penelope.

{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That two thatches CST and it is a Hirudinidae. fact2: This flyover is a Veronese and it is a kind of a peck if this flyover is not leguminous. fact3: If that that buffoon does not paneled q is correct then that two bites Penelope and layers. fact4: That buffoon bites Penelope and it is a sideropenia. fact5: The fact that that neuron does not paneled q is correct if something that paneled q is a defectiveness. fact6: That buffoon bites Penelope if this enterolith layers. fact7: That two is a kind of a tableau and is adventuresome. fact8: If that two does bite Penelope and layers that cowherb does not bite Penelope. fact9: If there is something such that that this thing is a kind of a Hirudinidae that does thatch CST does not hold then that buffoon does not thatch CST. fact10: There is something such that it paneleds q and is a defectiveness. fact11: That two minces and it layers. fact12: Someone is not a kind of a Priestley if the person portions Cumberland. fact13: That that coltsfoot is a Hirudinidae and thatches CST is incorrect if that neuron does not paneled q. fact14: This enterolith is a kind of a peck. fact15: The fact that that buffoon vulcanises if that that buffoon is a defectiveness is correct is correct. fact16: That buffoon is a peck if this enterolith is a peck. fact17: That two does not bite Penelope if that two owes Micromeria. fact18: That two is a kind of a exceedance that smoothens Hymenophyllaceae. fact19: This enterolith layers and does not vulcanise if this flyover is a peck. fact20: A peck that vulcanises does not paneled q. fact21: Some man that thatches CST does not bite Penelope. fact22: That two is a Hirudinidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That two does not bite Penelope. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That two thatches CST.; fact21 -> int2: If the fact that that two thatches CST is true then that two does not bite Penelope.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Bluegrass is symphonic.

{C}{d}

fact1: If something alarms then the thing devalues indaba. fact2: If this lipid replies and it is a kind of a mobile that teetotaler does not sprinkle July. fact3: This lipid does not reply and is a mobile if Genaro is not angiospermous. fact4: That this bookseller sprinkles July but that one is non-angiospermous is not true if Genaro is not symphonic. fact5: Genaro is not symphonic and he is not a multiplier if this lipid is not an awfulness. fact6: This lipid does not reply. fact7: That teetotaler does not sprinkle July if this lipid does not reply and is a mobile. fact8: Genaro is not angiospermous. fact9: That teetotaler does not reply but it is a kind of a mobile if this lipid does not sprinkle July. fact10: Every person is a kind of a compressed and that one alarms. fact11: The fact that this lipid does not reply hold if Genaro is not angiospermous. fact12: This lipid is not an awfulness if that teetotaler devalues indaba and is an awfulness. fact13: Someone that does not sprinkle July is both non-symphonic and angiospermous. fact14: Somebody is not a mobile if that it sprinkles July and is non-angiospermous does not hold.

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

This bookseller is not a mobile.

¬{AB}{cf}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something alarms then the thing devalues indaba. fact2: If this lipid replies and it is a kind of a mobile that teetotaler does not sprinkle July. fact3: This lipid does not reply and is a mobile if Genaro is not angiospermous. fact4: That this bookseller sprinkles July but that one is non-angiospermous is not true if Genaro is not symphonic. fact5: Genaro is not symphonic and he is not a multiplier if this lipid is not an awfulness. fact6: This lipid does not reply. fact7: That teetotaler does not sprinkle July if this lipid does not reply and is a mobile. fact8: Genaro is not angiospermous. fact9: That teetotaler does not reply but it is a kind of a mobile if this lipid does not sprinkle July. fact10: Every person is a kind of a compressed and that one alarms. fact11: The fact that this lipid does not reply hold if Genaro is not angiospermous. fact12: This lipid is not an awfulness if that teetotaler devalues indaba and is an awfulness. fact13: Someone that does not sprinkle July is both non-symphonic and angiospermous. fact14: Somebody is not a mobile if that it sprinkles July and is non-angiospermous does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That Bluegrass is symphonic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this progestogen is not a kind of a urethrocele and is not a kind of a macrocytosis is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That Algonquin is a Lasthenia and it is orbital. fact2: If the fact that that Algonquin is orbital but not a Lasthenia is not correct this progestogen is not a urethrocele. fact3: If this progestogen is not a urethrocele and that one is not a kind of a macrocytosis that Algonquin is not a kind of a Lasthenia. fact4: If someone is either not a macrocytosis or a Sikhism or both then the one is not a kind of a macrocytosis. fact5: That the fact that this progestogen is a kind of a urethrocele and is not a kind of a macrocytosis does not hold is correct. fact6: That Algonquin is orbital. fact7: Something is dysphoric if that thing is hymenal. fact8: This progestogen is not a urethrocele and is not a Lasthenia. fact9: That that Algonquin is not a urethrocele and it is non-orbital is wrong. fact10: If that something is dysphoric is correct then the fact that it is orbital but not a Lasthenia is incorrect. fact11: If this progestogen is not orbital then she is both not a urethrocele and not a macrocytosis. fact12: If this progestogen is both a urethrocele and not a macrocytosis that Algonquin is not a Lasthenia. fact13: This progestogen is not a urethrocele.

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

Let's assume that this progestogen is not a urethrocele and is not a macrocytosis.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Algonquin is a Lasthenia and it is orbital. fact2: If the fact that that Algonquin is orbital but not a Lasthenia is not correct this progestogen is not a urethrocele. fact3: If this progestogen is not a urethrocele and that one is not a kind of a macrocytosis that Algonquin is not a kind of a Lasthenia. fact4: If someone is either not a macrocytosis or a Sikhism or both then the one is not a kind of a macrocytosis. fact5: That the fact that this progestogen is a kind of a urethrocele and is not a kind of a macrocytosis does not hold is correct. fact6: That Algonquin is orbital. fact7: Something is dysphoric if that thing is hymenal. fact8: This progestogen is not a urethrocele and is not a Lasthenia. fact9: That that Algonquin is not a urethrocele and it is non-orbital is wrong. fact10: If that something is dysphoric is correct then the fact that it is orbital but not a Lasthenia is incorrect. fact11: If this progestogen is not orbital then she is both not a urethrocele and not a macrocytosis. fact12: If this progestogen is both a urethrocele and not a macrocytosis that Algonquin is not a Lasthenia. fact13: This progestogen is not a urethrocele. ; $hypothesis$ = That this progestogen is not a kind of a urethrocele and is not a kind of a macrocytosis is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this progestogen is not a urethrocele and is not a macrocytosis.; fact3 & assump1 -> int1: That Algonquin is not a Lasthenia.; fact1 -> int2: That Algonquin is a Lasthenia.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This demon is not a kind of a Chester and that one does not wiggle.

(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: That somebody is conjunct and it does impale attempted is wrong if it is not a kind of a Wycliffe. fact2: Something does not surround apperception if the fact that it is dermal and it surround apperception is false. fact3: If that sepulcher is not a Domitian that that shoreline is dermal and it does surround apperception is false. fact4: This demon does not wiggle if this demon surrounds apperception. fact5: If that that that monstrosity is conjunct and impales attempted is wrong is true then that sepulcher does not impales attempted. fact6: If something does not impale attempted then it is not a Domitian and it is not an inefficiency. fact7: The fact that this demon is not a Chester and does not wiggle is incorrect if that that shoreline does not surround apperception hold. fact8: That monstrosity is not a Wycliffe if that anorexic is not a kind of a Wycliffe and is not seductive. fact9: This demon is not a kind of a Chester and it does not surround apperception if this demon prioritises arrhythmia. fact10: Someone is not a Chester and he/she does not wiggle if he/she surrounds apperception. fact11: That anorexic is fingerless if this oxyphencyclimine is fingerless. fact12: That shoreline does not prioritise arrhythmia and this is not hypertensive. fact13: That shoreline does not prioritise arrhythmia. fact14: If that shoreline does wiggle and does not prioritise arrhythmia this demon surrounds apperception. fact15: Somebody that is fingerless is not a Wycliffe and not seductive. fact16: If this oxyphencyclimine either is not non-extraordinary or is not a riffraff or both this oxyphencyclimine is fingerless. fact17: That shoreline is topless.

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

The fact that this demon is not a Chester and does not wiggle is false.

¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That somebody is conjunct and it does impale attempted is wrong if it is not a kind of a Wycliffe. fact2: Something does not surround apperception if the fact that it is dermal and it surround apperception is false. fact3: If that sepulcher is not a Domitian that that shoreline is dermal and it does surround apperception is false. fact4: This demon does not wiggle if this demon surrounds apperception. fact5: If that that that monstrosity is conjunct and impales attempted is wrong is true then that sepulcher does not impales attempted. fact6: If something does not impale attempted then it is not a Domitian and it is not an inefficiency. fact7: The fact that this demon is not a Chester and does not wiggle is incorrect if that that shoreline does not surround apperception hold. fact8: That monstrosity is not a Wycliffe if that anorexic is not a kind of a Wycliffe and is not seductive. fact9: This demon is not a kind of a Chester and it does not surround apperception if this demon prioritises arrhythmia. fact10: Someone is not a Chester and he/she does not wiggle if he/she surrounds apperception. fact11: That anorexic is fingerless if this oxyphencyclimine is fingerless. fact12: That shoreline does not prioritise arrhythmia and this is not hypertensive. fact13: That shoreline does not prioritise arrhythmia. fact14: If that shoreline does wiggle and does not prioritise arrhythmia this demon surrounds apperception. fact15: Somebody that is fingerless is not a Wycliffe and not seductive. fact16: If this oxyphencyclimine either is not non-extraordinary or is not a riffraff or both this oxyphencyclimine is fingerless. fact17: That shoreline is topless. ; $hypothesis$ = This demon is not a kind of a Chester and that one does not wiggle. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That macaroni is a ward and a Procyon.

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

fact1: If the fact that that macaroni is a foiled that is not a ward is wrong then that one is a kind of a ward. fact2: That that macaroni is a foiled but it is not a ward is incorrect. fact3: That macaroni is hemic and that one interlaces. fact4: The fact that that macaroni is a ward and it is a Procyon does not hold if this monocyte does not pioneer Pinnipedia. fact5: Some person is a ward and advances faintness if it does not pioneer Pinnipedia. fact6: That this cornfield is not a foiled is correct if that the fact that that odometer is not a foiled and/or that person is comfy is correct is false. fact7: The fact that that macaroni refocuses tonight and is non-antennary is incorrect. fact8: That macaroni pioneers Pinnipedia. fact9: The fact that something does not jug Baku and pioneers Pinnipedia is false if that thing is not a kind of a foiled. fact10: That macaroni pioneers Pinnipedia and it is a Procyon. fact11: The fact that that macaroni is a foiled and this one is a kind of a ward does not hold.

fact1: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{a} fact2: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact3: ({GP}{a} & {T}{a}) fact4: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x & {ER}x) fact6: ¬(¬{E}{d} v {G}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c} fact7: ¬({GM}{a} & ¬{IO}{a}) fact8: {A}{a} fact9: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {A}x) fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: ¬({E}{a} & {C}{a})

The fact that that macaroni is a ward and it is a kind of a Procyon does not hold.

¬({C}{a} & {B}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that macaroni is a foiled that is not a ward is wrong then that one is a kind of a ward. fact2: That that macaroni is a foiled but it is not a ward is incorrect. fact3: That macaroni is hemic and that one interlaces. fact4: The fact that that macaroni is a ward and it is a Procyon does not hold if this monocyte does not pioneer Pinnipedia. fact5: Some person is a ward and advances faintness if it does not pioneer Pinnipedia. fact6: That this cornfield is not a foiled is correct if that the fact that that odometer is not a foiled and/or that person is comfy is correct is false. fact7: The fact that that macaroni refocuses tonight and is non-antennary is incorrect. fact8: That macaroni pioneers Pinnipedia. fact9: The fact that something does not jug Baku and pioneers Pinnipedia is false if that thing is not a kind of a foiled. fact10: That macaroni pioneers Pinnipedia and it is a Procyon. fact11: The fact that that macaroni is a foiled and this one is a kind of a ward does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That macaroni is a ward and a Procyon. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: The fact that that macaroni is a Procyon is right.; fact1 & fact2 -> int2: That macaroni is a ward.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this psycholinguisticness does not occurs hold.

¬{B}

fact1: If this objectiveness does not happens then both this psycholinguisticness and this specking NPA happens. fact2: This specking NPA does not occurs. fact3: If this specking NPA happens that the fact that either the heaping M happens or the confederate does not happens or both is right is incorrect. fact4: If this specking NPA does not happens then that either this mucousness happens or that relying does not happens or both is incorrect.

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

This psycholinguisticness happens.

{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this objectiveness does not happens then both this psycholinguisticness and this specking NPA happens. fact2: This specking NPA does not occurs. fact3: If this specking NPA happens that the fact that either the heaping M happens or the confederate does not happens or both is right is incorrect. fact4: If this specking NPA does not happens then that either this mucousness happens or that relying does not happens or both is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That this psycholinguisticness does not occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This diluting Didelphis happens.

{D}

fact1: That cadaverousness occurs. fact2: If this associatoriness occurs that notthat xeroradiography but that uncompartmentedness happens is false. fact3: That coitalness and that cadaverousness occurs. fact4: This diluting Didelphis is prevented by that that coitalness happens and/or that that xeroradiography occurs. fact5: If that cadaverousness does not occurs both this diluting Didelphis and that coitalness happens. fact6: That cadaverousness does not happens if that notthat xeroradiography but that uncompartmentedness occurs does not hold. fact7: If either this toughening happens or the assaulting deepness does not happens or both the fact that this associatoriness occurs hold.

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

This diluting Didelphis happens.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cadaverousness occurs. fact2: If this associatoriness occurs that notthat xeroradiography but that uncompartmentedness happens is false. fact3: That coitalness and that cadaverousness occurs. fact4: This diluting Didelphis is prevented by that that coitalness happens and/or that that xeroradiography occurs. fact5: If that cadaverousness does not occurs both this diluting Didelphis and that coitalness happens. fact6: That cadaverousness does not happens if that notthat xeroradiography but that uncompartmentedness occurs does not hold. fact7: If either this toughening happens or the assaulting deepness does not happens or both the fact that this associatoriness occurs hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This diluting Didelphis happens. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That coitalness occurs.; int1 -> int2: That coitalness and/or that xeroradiography happens.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that contrasting does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The ruff does not occurs and the blinderness does not happens. fact2: This nonmechanicalness does not happens. fact3: The extermination does not occurs. fact4: If the squeegeeing Tunga does not occurs then this inhabiting Jansenism happens. fact5: The fact that the unenterprisingness happens is right if the blinderness does not occurs. fact6: If that contrasting does not happens the comparting invariant happens. fact7: The Demosthenicness does not happens. fact8: This osseousness occurs. fact9: That auctorialness does not happens.

fact1: (¬{BT} & ¬{FF}) fact2: ¬{HK} fact3: ¬{FB} fact4: ¬{DG} -> {DD} fact5: ¬{FF} -> {BP} fact6: ¬{A} -> {B} fact7: ¬{O} fact8: {GH} fact9: ¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The ruff does not occurs and the blinderness does not happens. fact2: This nonmechanicalness does not happens. fact3: The extermination does not occurs. fact4: If the squeegeeing Tunga does not occurs then this inhabiting Jansenism happens. fact5: The fact that the unenterprisingness happens is right if the blinderness does not occurs. fact6: If that contrasting does not happens the comparting invariant happens. fact7: The Demosthenicness does not happens. fact8: This osseousness occurs. fact9: That auctorialness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that contrasting does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That unloading occurs.

{A}

fact1: Either that that unloading does not occurs or that that earthing hudud does not occurs or both prevents that that unloading occurs. fact2: That transvestitism happens. fact3: This teaching Madoqua does not occurs. fact4: That unloading happens if the earone hudud happens. fact5: That anoperinealness happens. fact6: This theologising is caused by that this calling Apsu happens but the yellowing Tuchman does not happens. fact7: That commercial occurs but this uneventfulness does not occurs. fact8: That exulting freebie happens. fact9: That that commercial occurs is prevented by that this binding Thlaspi does not occurs and/or that this usage happens. fact10: That daylight but notthis teaching Madoqua occurs. fact11: This binding Thlaspi does not happens if that this binding Thlaspi occurs and that quadrasonicness happens is incorrect. fact12: The fact that that contest but notthe burning misquote occurs hold. fact13: The extrasystole but notthe localisation occurs. fact14: This cast happens. fact15: That that daylight happens and this teaching Madoqua does not happens prevents that this earman hudud does not happens. fact16: This argillaceousness occurs if that lash occurs. fact17: If the fact that the trash happens and that introspectiveness does not occurs hold then the deceasing humanness occurs. fact18: If that daylight occurs and this teaching Madoqua occurs the fact that that earthing hudud happens hold. fact19: The fact that that parabolicalness happens and that sternalness occurs does not hold if that commercial does not happens. fact20: If the fact that the fact that both that parabolicalness and that sternalness occurs is wrong is true the fact that that earthing hudud does not happens is right.

fact1: (¬{A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact2: {FG} fact3: ¬{AB} fact4: {B} -> {A} fact5: {DT} fact6: ({HS} & ¬{DP}) -> {BG} fact7: ({E} & ¬{BT}) fact8: {JA} fact9: (¬{G} v {F}) -> ¬{E} fact10: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact11: ¬({G} & {H}) -> ¬{G} fact12: ({ER} & ¬{AK}) fact13: ({HB} & ¬{AH}) fact14: {BO} fact15: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact16: {CA} -> {DB} fact17: ({HR} & ¬{M}) -> {EC} fact18: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact19: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact20: ¬({C} & {D}) -> ¬{B}

That unloading does not occurs.

¬{A}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either that that unloading does not occurs or that that earthing hudud does not occurs or both prevents that that unloading occurs. fact2: That transvestitism happens. fact3: This teaching Madoqua does not occurs. fact4: That unloading happens if the earone hudud happens. fact5: That anoperinealness happens. fact6: This theologising is caused by that this calling Apsu happens but the yellowing Tuchman does not happens. fact7: That commercial occurs but this uneventfulness does not occurs. fact8: That exulting freebie happens. fact9: That that commercial occurs is prevented by that this binding Thlaspi does not occurs and/or that this usage happens. fact10: That daylight but notthis teaching Madoqua occurs. fact11: This binding Thlaspi does not happens if that this binding Thlaspi occurs and that quadrasonicness happens is incorrect. fact12: The fact that that contest but notthe burning misquote occurs hold. fact13: The extrasystole but notthe localisation occurs. fact14: This cast happens. fact15: That that daylight happens and this teaching Madoqua does not happens prevents that this earman hudud does not happens. fact16: This argillaceousness occurs if that lash occurs. fact17: If the fact that the trash happens and that introspectiveness does not occurs hold then the deceasing humanness occurs. fact18: If that daylight occurs and this teaching Madoqua occurs the fact that that earthing hudud happens hold. fact19: The fact that that parabolicalness happens and that sternalness occurs does not hold if that commercial does not happens. fact20: If the fact that the fact that both that parabolicalness and that sternalness occurs is wrong is true the fact that that earthing hudud does not happens is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That unloading occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact10 -> int1: That earthing hudud happens.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That herdsman is a kind of a sneering.

{C}{a}

fact1: The ticking is not a sneering. fact2: If that herdsman does thresh and becharms abettal then that herdsman does not fatten. fact3: If this ornamentation does not fatten then that that herdsman fatten and/or it threshes does not hold. fact4: Some person is not a sneering if the fact that this one either fattens or threshes or both does not hold. fact5: That herdsman threshes if it is a castle.

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

That herdsman is a kind of a sneering.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The ticking is not a sneering. fact2: If that herdsman does thresh and becharms abettal then that herdsman does not fatten. fact3: If this ornamentation does not fatten then that that herdsman fatten and/or it threshes does not hold. fact4: Some person is not a sneering if the fact that this one either fattens or threshes or both does not hold. fact5: That herdsman threshes if it is a castle. ; $hypothesis$ = That herdsman is a kind of a sneering. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Everything disentangles.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Every person overgrows Quran. fact2: Every man does flog. fact3: Everybody is a Plantago. fact4: Everything blesses Chalcidae. fact5: Everything eyes Goodeniaceae. fact6: That every man is a dissymmetry is correct. fact7: Everybody is a kind of a sprechstimme. fact8: Everyone is unmodifiable. fact9: Everyone is a Arctostaphylos. fact10: Everything disentangles. fact11: The fact that everybody is a kind of a Tibur hold. fact12: Every man is meteoric. fact13: Every man is not non-atoxic.

fact1: (x): {EB}x fact2: (x): {AA}x fact3: (x): {CT}x fact4: (x): {C}x fact5: (x): {AE}x fact6: (x): {DM}x fact7: (x): {R}x fact8: (x): {AP}x fact9: (x): {B}x fact10: (x): {A}x fact11: (x): {AS}x fact12: (x): {AT}x fact13: (x): {AI}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Every person overgrows Quran. fact2: Every man does flog. fact3: Everybody is a Plantago. fact4: Everything blesses Chalcidae. fact5: Everything eyes Goodeniaceae. fact6: That every man is a dissymmetry is correct. fact7: Everybody is a kind of a sprechstimme. fact8: Everyone is unmodifiable. fact9: Everyone is a Arctostaphylos. fact10: Everything disentangles. fact11: The fact that everybody is a kind of a Tibur hold. fact12: Every man is meteoric. fact13: Every man is not non-atoxic. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything disentangles. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Tagalog is amaurotic.

{B}{a}

fact1: That Tagalog is not a kind of a Pseudomonadales. fact2: That Tagalog is a kind of a subunit but this person is not a Pseudomonadales. fact3: Something is a caddie and is not a amorousness if it is not Carthaginian. fact4: If that something is Carthaginian but it is not amaurotic does not hold then it is Carthaginian. fact5: The fact that the fact that that Tagalog is a kind of an attempt but it is not copulatory is true does not hold if this alligatorfish is not a wraith. fact6: That this tactician is a kind of an attempt is true if the fact that that Tagalog is an attempt but it is not copulatory does not hold. fact7: If that Tagalog is a subunit but the thing is not a Pseudomonadales the fact that that Tagalog is not amaurotic is right. fact8: If someone is an attempt then that it is Carthaginian and it is not amaurotic does not hold. fact9: Every person is not a Ginkgopsida. fact10: Somebody mismarries but this person is not a wraith if this person is not a Ginkgopsida. fact11: If something is not Carthaginian then it either is an attempt or is amaurotic or both. fact12: If this stomach is both not non-copulatory and not a wraith this alligatorfish is not Carthaginian. fact13: That Tagalog is not amaurotic if that Tagalog is a kind of a subunit and is a kind of a Pseudomonadales.

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

This tactician is a caddie and is not a amorousness.

({BC}{ao} & ¬{T}{ao})

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That Tagalog is not a kind of a Pseudomonadales. fact2: That Tagalog is a kind of a subunit but this person is not a Pseudomonadales. fact3: Something is a caddie and is not a amorousness if it is not Carthaginian. fact4: If that something is Carthaginian but it is not amaurotic does not hold then it is Carthaginian. fact5: The fact that the fact that that Tagalog is a kind of an attempt but it is not copulatory is true does not hold if this alligatorfish is not a wraith. fact6: That this tactician is a kind of an attempt is true if the fact that that Tagalog is an attempt but it is not copulatory does not hold. fact7: If that Tagalog is a subunit but the thing is not a Pseudomonadales the fact that that Tagalog is not amaurotic is right. fact8: If someone is an attempt then that it is Carthaginian and it is not amaurotic does not hold. fact9: Every person is not a Ginkgopsida. fact10: Somebody mismarries but this person is not a wraith if this person is not a Ginkgopsida. fact11: If something is not Carthaginian then it either is an attempt or is amaurotic or both. fact12: If this stomach is both not non-copulatory and not a wraith this alligatorfish is not Carthaginian. fact13: That Tagalog is not amaurotic if that Tagalog is a kind of a subunit and is a kind of a Pseudomonadales. ; $hypothesis$ = That Tagalog is amaurotic. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That translocation is a JHVH.

{B}{aa}

fact1: If some person is a kind of a fare that it does not hatted and is not a kind of a JHVH is wrong. fact2: If that mink smokes the fact that the fact that that is not irrelevant and is a JHVH is true does not hold. fact3: If something is a kind of a Armin that it is both not a fare and not a JHVH is false. fact4: That if the fact that that translocation is not a kind of a Armin and the person is not a fare does not hold that translocation is not a JHVH is true. fact5: That this caroler does not frizzle Mendel and it is not a gleaming is incorrect if that it does not hatted does not hold. fact6: If something is a Armin then the fact that it hatteds and is not a JHVH is incorrect. fact7: If that the silverspot does not discern hold that worktable is a Aare but it does not effloresce Desmidium. fact8: That turbofan does not effloresce Desmidium if that worktable is a Aare and does not effloresce Desmidium. fact9: If that groundberry is a fare then that that is not inattentive and that is a kind of a bottomed is wrong. fact10: The fact that that translocation hatteds but the person is non-quartzose is incorrect. fact11: The fact that the FPD is not a kind of a Eustoma and the one is not a Armin is incorrect. fact12: The fact that something is both not a Armin and not a fare does not hold if it hatteds. fact13: That translocation is not a JHVH if that translocation is a fare. fact14: If something is not a Assault that is not intelligible and that is a Mr. fact15: That translocation is not a allergology. fact16: That translocation is a JHVH and this thing does hatted if Astrid does not effloresce Desmidium. fact17: That translocation is a JHVH if Astrid is a kind of a JHVH. fact18: If that something is not a Mr is true then this is non-Armenian thing that does not discern. fact19: Astrid is a kind of a JHVH and it hatteds if that turbofan does not effloresce Desmidium. fact20: Something does not effloresce Desmidium and does not discern if it is a Aare. fact21: That the eggar is not a kind of a abrasiveness and is not quartzose is not correct. fact22: The silverspot is not a Mr if this epileptic is both not intelligible and a Mr.

fact1: (x): {AB}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact2: {BE}{gh} -> ¬(¬{BS}{gh} & {B}{gh}) fact3: (x): {AA}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{B}x) fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact5: {A}{au} -> ¬(¬{BM}{au} & ¬{CL}{au}) fact6: (x): {AA}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact7: ¬{D}{d} -> ({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) fact8: ({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact9: {AB}{h} -> ¬(¬{IL}{h} & {DT}{h}) fact10: ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{HT}{aa}) fact11: ¬(¬{HM}{o} & ¬{AA}{o}) fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact13: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact14: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{I}x & {G}x) fact15: ¬{BQ}{aa} fact16: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact17: {B}{a} -> {B}{aa} fact18: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{D}x) fact19: ¬{C}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact20: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact21: ¬(¬{GN}{gl} & ¬{HT}{gl}) fact22: (¬{I}{e} & {G}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d}

That translocation is a JHVH.

{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is a kind of a fare that it does not hatted and is not a kind of a JHVH is wrong. fact2: If that mink smokes the fact that the fact that that is not irrelevant and is a JHVH is true does not hold. fact3: If something is a kind of a Armin that it is both not a fare and not a JHVH is false. fact4: That if the fact that that translocation is not a kind of a Armin and the person is not a fare does not hold that translocation is not a JHVH is true. fact5: That this caroler does not frizzle Mendel and it is not a gleaming is incorrect if that it does not hatted does not hold. fact6: If something is a Armin then the fact that it hatteds and is not a JHVH is incorrect. fact7: If that the silverspot does not discern hold that worktable is a Aare but it does not effloresce Desmidium. fact8: That turbofan does not effloresce Desmidium if that worktable is a Aare and does not effloresce Desmidium. fact9: If that groundberry is a fare then that that is not inattentive and that is a kind of a bottomed is wrong. fact10: The fact that that translocation hatteds but the person is non-quartzose is incorrect. fact11: The fact that the FPD is not a kind of a Eustoma and the one is not a Armin is incorrect. fact12: The fact that something is both not a Armin and not a fare does not hold if it hatteds. fact13: That translocation is not a JHVH if that translocation is a fare. fact14: If something is not a Assault that is not intelligible and that is a Mr. fact15: That translocation is not a allergology. fact16: That translocation is a JHVH and this thing does hatted if Astrid does not effloresce Desmidium. fact17: That translocation is a JHVH if Astrid is a kind of a JHVH. fact18: If that something is not a Mr is true then this is non-Armenian thing that does not discern. fact19: Astrid is a kind of a JHVH and it hatteds if that turbofan does not effloresce Desmidium. fact20: Something does not effloresce Desmidium and does not discern if it is a Aare. fact21: That the eggar is not a kind of a abrasiveness and is not quartzose is not correct. fact22: The silverspot is not a Mr if this epileptic is both not intelligible and a Mr. ; $hypothesis$ = That translocation is a JHVH. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Psyche does not plain Nigroporus but it sunders.

(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: That reformist sunders if that Psyche is not non-amaranthine. fact2: That that reformist is not amaranthine but it creases is incorrect. fact3: That reformist does not sunder if the fact that that Psyche does not plain Nigroporus but she/he is a Tientsin is not correct. fact4: This housemother does not sunder. fact5: If that that reformist is not a Tientsin but it is amaranthine does not hold that Psyche does not plain Nigroporus. fact6: If that Psyche is non-amaranthine then that reformist is not a Tientsin. fact7: That that reformist does not sunder is not false. fact8: That Psyche does sunder if this calif creases. fact9: This calif creases. fact10: That Psyche is a Tientsin. fact11: If this calif does not sunder then that Psyche does not crease. fact12: If the fact that that Psyche is a kind of non-amaranthine man that sunders does not hold that reformist does not plain Nigroporus. fact13: That reformist does not crease. fact14: That reformist does not plain Nigroporus. fact15: The fact that the fact that that reformist is not a Tientsin and is amaranthine is wrong hold.

fact1: {AB}{b} -> {A}{a} fact2: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {C}{a}) fact3: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact4: ¬{A}{e} fact5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact6: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact7: ¬{A}{a} fact8: {C}{c} -> {A}{b} fact9: {C}{c} fact10: {AA}{b} fact11: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬{C}{b} fact12: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact13: ¬{C}{a} fact14: ¬{B}{a} fact15: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That reformist sunders if that Psyche is not non-amaranthine. fact2: That that reformist is not amaranthine but it creases is incorrect. fact3: That reformist does not sunder if the fact that that Psyche does not plain Nigroporus but she/he is a Tientsin is not correct. fact4: This housemother does not sunder. fact5: If that that reformist is not a Tientsin but it is amaranthine does not hold that Psyche does not plain Nigroporus. fact6: If that Psyche is non-amaranthine then that reformist is not a Tientsin. fact7: That that reformist does not sunder is not false. fact8: That Psyche does sunder if this calif creases. fact9: This calif creases. fact10: That Psyche is a Tientsin. fact11: If this calif does not sunder then that Psyche does not crease. fact12: If the fact that that Psyche is a kind of non-amaranthine man that sunders does not hold that reformist does not plain Nigroporus. fact13: That reformist does not crease. fact14: That reformist does not plain Nigroporus. fact15: The fact that the fact that that reformist is not a Tientsin and is amaranthine is wrong hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That Psyche does not plain Nigroporus but it sunders. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact15 -> int1: That Psyche does not plain Nigroporus.; fact8 & fact9 -> int2: That Psyche does sunder.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Skagit is a kind of a Ginkgoaceae.

{A}{c}

fact1: If that Nena does not relinquish disesteem and this thing does not rush fondness does not hold then that Skagit rush fondness. fact2: This bugger does not consolidate Ellul if Nena does not rush fondness. fact3: This bugger does not rush fondness if Nena is a plotted. fact4: Something does not tower if the fact that it is not indelicate and it is not presbyopic is wrong. fact5: That Nena consolidates Ellul and is not a kind of a plotted is wrong. fact6: If that Skagit is a kind of a stock then that Skagit is a octameter. fact7: That Skagit does not rush fondness if this bugger is not a Ginkgoaceae. fact8: If that this bugger bares geology and does obey underbrush does not hold Nena does not bares geology. fact9: If someone is a kind of a octameter the person is not a paramilitary and the person does not relinquish disesteem. fact10: If Nena does not rush fondness this bugger is not a plotted. fact11: Something is not a kind of a paramilitary if the fact that this thing is a kind of a paramilitary that is not a stock is incorrect. fact12: The fact that this bugger is not indelicate and not presbyopic does not hold if he/she is corymbose. fact13: This bugger does not clot ametropia. fact14: That something is a paramilitary that is not a stock does not hold if this is a octameter. fact15: That Nena is a octameter and this person is a kind of a pharmaceutic is right if Nena does not bare geology. fact16: If this bugger does not rush fondness that Skagit is not a kind of a Ginkgoaceae. fact17: If this bugger does not tower then the fact that this bugger bares geology and obeys underbrush is incorrect. fact18: If the fact that Nena consolidates Ellul but the person is not a plotted is wrong this bugger does not rush fondness. fact19: The fact that some person does not relinquish disesteem and it does not rush fondness is wrong if it is not a paramilitary. fact20: The fact that Nena does not rush fondness is true if this bugger does not consolidate Ellul. fact21: This bugger is not a kind of a plotted. fact22: The fact that Nena does consolidate Ellul and is a plotted does not hold. fact23: Something is a Ginkgoaceae if the thing rushes fondness.

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

That Skagit is a kind of a Ginkgoaceae.

{A}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that Nena does not relinquish disesteem and this thing does not rush fondness does not hold then that Skagit rush fondness. fact2: This bugger does not consolidate Ellul if Nena does not rush fondness. fact3: This bugger does not rush fondness if Nena is a plotted. fact4: Something does not tower if the fact that it is not indelicate and it is not presbyopic is wrong. fact5: That Nena consolidates Ellul and is not a kind of a plotted is wrong. fact6: If that Skagit is a kind of a stock then that Skagit is a octameter. fact7: That Skagit does not rush fondness if this bugger is not a Ginkgoaceae. fact8: If that this bugger bares geology and does obey underbrush does not hold Nena does not bares geology. fact9: If someone is a kind of a octameter the person is not a paramilitary and the person does not relinquish disesteem. fact10: If Nena does not rush fondness this bugger is not a plotted. fact11: Something is not a kind of a paramilitary if the fact that this thing is a kind of a paramilitary that is not a stock is incorrect. fact12: The fact that this bugger is not indelicate and not presbyopic does not hold if he/she is corymbose. fact13: This bugger does not clot ametropia. fact14: That something is a paramilitary that is not a stock does not hold if this is a octameter. fact15: That Nena is a octameter and this person is a kind of a pharmaceutic is right if Nena does not bare geology. fact16: If this bugger does not rush fondness that Skagit is not a kind of a Ginkgoaceae. fact17: If this bugger does not tower then the fact that this bugger bares geology and obeys underbrush is incorrect. fact18: If the fact that Nena consolidates Ellul but the person is not a plotted is wrong this bugger does not rush fondness. fact19: The fact that some person does not relinquish disesteem and it does not rush fondness is wrong if it is not a paramilitary. fact20: The fact that Nena does not rush fondness is true if this bugger does not consolidate Ellul. fact21: This bugger is not a kind of a plotted. fact22: The fact that Nena does consolidate Ellul and is a plotted does not hold. fact23: Something is a Ginkgoaceae if the thing rushes fondness. ; $hypothesis$ = That Skagit is a kind of a Ginkgoaceae. ; $proof$ =

fact18 & fact5 -> int1: This bugger does not rush fondness.; int1 & fact16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cruciferousness does not happens and that haze does not occurs.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That that cruciferousness does not occurs and that haze does not occurs is caused by this non-nephriticness. fact2: That nephriticness does not occurs if that the quelling O'Neill happens and that traceableness occurs is not true. fact3: That that cruciferousness does not happens and that haze does not happens is incorrect.

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

That cruciferousness does not happens and that haze does not occurs.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that cruciferousness does not occurs and that haze does not occurs is caused by this non-nephriticness. fact2: That nephriticness does not occurs if that the quelling O'Neill happens and that traceableness occurs is not true. fact3: That that cruciferousness does not happens and that haze does not happens is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That cruciferousness does not happens and that haze does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this modillion does not unite Epictetus hold.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This modillion is a kind of a shoddiness and does unite Epictetus.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This modillion is a kind of a shoddiness and does unite Epictetus. ; $hypothesis$ = That this modillion does not unite Epictetus hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That TC does corn potentiality.

{B}{a}

fact1: If the fact that that TC does not stretch stumper is correct then it does not corn potentiality. fact2: If that this MAOI does not brecciate Rupicola but she is a Pterocnemia does not hold that TC is not a Pterocnemia. fact3: Jamal does not stretch stumper. fact4: The fact that this MAOI does not brecciate Rupicola and is a Pterocnemia is wrong if it is classic. fact5: If this MAOI corns potentiality but it does not unmask that TC corns potentiality. fact6: That some person that is not a Pterocnemia does corn potentiality and/or is an upstage is correct. fact7: The fact that something is a Schistosoma and that is a Duncan is incorrect if that does not unmask. fact8: If the fact that that TC is nonparametric man that hypophysectomises permeability is wrong it is non-antipodean. fact9: If the fact that that TC is nonparametric and stretches stumper is incorrect that TC does not corn potentiality.

fact1: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: ¬(¬{F}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact3: ¬{AB}{ej} fact4: {E}{b} -> ¬(¬{F}{b} & {D}{b}) fact5: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {B}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x v {C}x) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({HK}x & {CL}x) fact8: ¬({AA}{a} & {BO}{a}) -> ¬{DL}{a} fact9: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}

That TC does corn potentiality.

{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that TC does not stretch stumper is correct then it does not corn potentiality. fact2: If that this MAOI does not brecciate Rupicola but she is a Pterocnemia does not hold that TC is not a Pterocnemia. fact3: Jamal does not stretch stumper. fact4: The fact that this MAOI does not brecciate Rupicola and is a Pterocnemia is wrong if it is classic. fact5: If this MAOI corns potentiality but it does not unmask that TC corns potentiality. fact6: That some person that is not a Pterocnemia does corn potentiality and/or is an upstage is correct. fact7: The fact that something is a Schistosoma and that is a Duncan is incorrect if that does not unmask. fact8: If the fact that that TC is nonparametric man that hypophysectomises permeability is wrong it is non-antipodean. fact9: If the fact that that TC is nonparametric and stretches stumper is incorrect that TC does not corn potentiality. ; $hypothesis$ = That TC does corn potentiality. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That podzol is a Dematiaceae.

{C}{b}

fact1: The foghorn does substantiate. fact2: If that podzol says manner and substantiates that puppy is not a Dematiaceae. fact3: That podzol does not say manner. fact4: The catcher says manner. fact5: If that podzol substantiates and is a kind of a Dematiaceae that puppy does not say manner. fact6: That puppy does say manner. fact7: If the fact that somebody does not say manner and the one does not substantiate does not hold then the one is a kind of a Dematiaceae. fact8: That podzol is not a Collinsonia. fact9: The fact that that puppy is a Dematiaceae hold. fact10: this manner does say puppy. fact11: The wreath is a kind of a Dematiaceae. fact12: The Udmurt is a Dematiaceae. fact13: That chesterfield does not substantiate. fact14: The Aristopak worsens and is a Dematiaceae. fact15: That podzol does not substantiate. fact16: The Lego says manner. fact17: The mina does not substantiate. fact18: That podzol is gracious and is a microvolt. fact19: The fact that that puppy substantiates is right. fact20: That podzol is not a Dematiaceae if that puppy substantiates and says manner.

fact1: {A}{dq} fact2: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: ¬{B}{b} fact4: {B}{cd} fact5: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: {B}{a} fact7: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {C}x fact8: ¬{L}{b} fact9: {C}{a} fact10: {AA}{aa} fact11: {C}{fn} fact12: {C}{ct} fact13: ¬{A}{ig} fact14: ({FI}{eo} & {C}{eo}) fact15: ¬{A}{b} fact16: {B}{gd} fact17: ¬{A}{hr} fact18: ({DE}{b} & {EQ}{b}) fact19: {A}{a} fact20: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b}

That podzol is a Dematiaceae.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The foghorn does substantiate. fact2: If that podzol says manner and substantiates that puppy is not a Dematiaceae. fact3: That podzol does not say manner. fact4: The catcher says manner. fact5: If that podzol substantiates and is a kind of a Dematiaceae that puppy does not say manner. fact6: That puppy does say manner. fact7: If the fact that somebody does not say manner and the one does not substantiate does not hold then the one is a kind of a Dematiaceae. fact8: That podzol is not a Collinsonia. fact9: The fact that that puppy is a Dematiaceae hold. fact10: this manner does say puppy. fact11: The wreath is a kind of a Dematiaceae. fact12: The Udmurt is a Dematiaceae. fact13: That chesterfield does not substantiate. fact14: The Aristopak worsens and is a Dematiaceae. fact15: That podzol does not substantiate. fact16: The Lego says manner. fact17: The mina does not substantiate. fact18: That podzol is gracious and is a microvolt. fact19: The fact that that puppy substantiates is right. fact20: That podzol is not a Dematiaceae if that puppy substantiates and says manner. ; $hypothesis$ = That podzol is a Dematiaceae. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact6 -> int1: That puppy substantiates and says manner.; int1 & fact20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That starling is unambiguous and that thing is rocky.

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

fact1: If something is not a Stalinist then the fact that that is rocky is not incorrect. fact2: The fact that this eyeliner does not pluralise and is basaltic is wrong. fact3: That starling publishes and it is disreputable. fact4: That starling is not a Stalinist if the fact that this eyeliner does not pluralise and is basaltic does not hold. fact5: A reputable thing is not a Stalinist and does publish. fact6: Something that publishes is unambiguous.

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

That that starling is unambiguous and it is rocky is incorrect.

¬({C}{b} & {A}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not a Stalinist then the fact that that is rocky is not incorrect. fact2: The fact that this eyeliner does not pluralise and is basaltic is wrong. fact3: That starling publishes and it is disreputable. fact4: That starling is not a Stalinist if the fact that this eyeliner does not pluralise and is basaltic does not hold. fact5: A reputable thing is not a Stalinist and does publish. fact6: Something that publishes is unambiguous. ; $hypothesis$ = That starling is unambiguous and that thing is rocky. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> int1: That starling is not a Stalinist.; fact1 -> int2: If that starling is not a Stalinist then it is rocky.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That that starling is rocky is right.; fact6 -> int4: If that starling publishes that it is unambiguous hold.; fact3 -> int5: The fact that that starling does not publish is wrong.; int4 & int5 -> int6: That starling is unambiguous.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That cyclone pesters bruising.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Some person pesters bruising if it does not whore Remilegia and falsifies Moirai. fact2: That cyclone is a Salim. fact3: If something is a valuable this fits Akaba and does not pester bruising. fact4: That cyclone does not whore Remilegia and does falsify Moirai if it is a Salim. fact5: This pearlfish is a valuable if this pearlfish is neural. fact6: If this pearlfish does not pester bruising but the person is a citizenship that cyclone does not pester bruising.

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

That cyclone does not pester bruising.

¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person pesters bruising if it does not whore Remilegia and falsifies Moirai. fact2: That cyclone is a Salim. fact3: If something is a valuable this fits Akaba and does not pester bruising. fact4: That cyclone does not whore Remilegia and does falsify Moirai if it is a Salim. fact5: This pearlfish is a valuable if this pearlfish is neural. fact6: If this pearlfish does not pester bruising but the person is a citizenship that cyclone does not pester bruising. ; $hypothesis$ = That cyclone pesters bruising. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That cyclone pesters bruising if it does not whore Remilegia and it falsifies Moirai.; fact4 & fact2 -> int2: That cyclone does not whore Remilegia and falsifies Moirai.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That interviewer is not orthopaedic.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: Every person is unscalable. fact2: Someone is unprocessed if the fact that it does not teetertotter inkiness and is not unprocessed is wrong. fact3: Something that is a Otho and/or is not theistic does not forefend unsolvability. fact4: If that something does not belay and it is not a kind of a grunt is wrong it belay. fact5: The fact that the fact that the fact that that pakchoi is not a kind of a pittance and does not boggle hold is wrong is not false. fact6: Something is not a pittance and that thing does not boggle. fact7: Either this barracuda is a Otho or it is not theistic or both if this barracuda is inauspicious. fact8: That interviewer is not orthopaedic if this barracuda does not forefend unsolvability and is not a carnality. fact9: That Hank does not teetertotter inkiness and it is not unprocessed is wrong. fact10: This barracuda is inauspicious if this Mongoloid belays. fact11: If Hank is unprocessed that this Mongoloid does not belay and is not a kind of a grunt is wrong. fact12: If that that this barracuda is a carnality and not pietistic hold does not hold this barracuda is not a kind of a carnality. fact13: That interviewer is orthopaedic if the fact that that interviewer is a carnality hold. fact14: That interviewer is a carnality if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a pittance and it does not boggle is not correct.

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

That interviewer is not orthopaedic.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every person is unscalable. fact2: Someone is unprocessed if the fact that it does not teetertotter inkiness and is not unprocessed is wrong. fact3: Something that is a Otho and/or is not theistic does not forefend unsolvability. fact4: If that something does not belay and it is not a kind of a grunt is wrong it belay. fact5: The fact that the fact that the fact that that pakchoi is not a kind of a pittance and does not boggle hold is wrong is not false. fact6: Something is not a pittance and that thing does not boggle. fact7: Either this barracuda is a Otho or it is not theistic or both if this barracuda is inauspicious. fact8: That interviewer is not orthopaedic if this barracuda does not forefend unsolvability and is not a carnality. fact9: That Hank does not teetertotter inkiness and it is not unprocessed is wrong. fact10: This barracuda is inauspicious if this Mongoloid belays. fact11: If Hank is unprocessed that this Mongoloid does not belay and is not a kind of a grunt is wrong. fact12: If that that this barracuda is a carnality and not pietistic hold does not hold this barracuda is not a kind of a carnality. fact13: That interviewer is orthopaedic if the fact that that interviewer is a carnality hold. fact14: That interviewer is a carnality if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a pittance and it does not boggle is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That interviewer is not orthopaedic. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: There exists someone such that the fact that he/she is not a pittance and he/she does not boggle is false.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That interviewer is a kind of a carnality.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That girlfriend is both not non-heliac and a shortage.

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

fact1: Something that chords wiliness does not preach and is haemolytic. fact2: The exotherm is a Faraday and it is a generalisation. fact3: This basso is exhaustible and that one is a greenishness if that one does not incriminate. fact4: Cris is a shortage. fact5: This basso does not quicken if the fact that that coatee either is a Umbrina or does not winter Selcraig or both is not right. fact6: That girlfriend is a kind of a shortage. fact7: That girlfriend does rectify Spain. fact8: If something is exhaustible it does not winter Selcraig. fact9: That that coatee is a Umbrina or does not winter Selcraig or both does not hold. fact10: That girlfriend does jest Nuffield and is a Hickock. fact11: If that that coatee is a Rubia but not a Umbrina does not hold then this basso does not quicken. fact12: The fact that that coatee is a Rubia but it is not a Umbrina is incorrect if that coatee is a Apiaceae. fact13: That girlfriend is non-haemolytic if this basso does not preach but that one is non-haemolytic. fact14: That punks is amphibious and it is a kind of a jumping. fact15: That coatee is a Apiaceae. fact16: Some man chords wiliness if it does not quicken and it does not winter Selcraig. fact17: That girlfriend is not non-attributive. fact18: If this basso does not quicken then this bounds preaches and does not chord wiliness. fact19: The fact that that girlfriend is a brood and a Wed is not wrong. fact20: That some man is heliac man that is a shortage is wrong if it is non-haemolytic.

fact1: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) fact2: ({BH}{hp} & {AJ}{hp}) fact3: ¬{M}{b} -> ({J}{b} & {K}{b}) fact4: {B}{jj} fact5: ¬({H}{c} v ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact6: {B}{a} fact7: {FQ}{a} fact8: (x): {J}x -> ¬{G}x fact9: ¬({H}{c} v ¬{G}{c}) fact10: ({IK}{a} & {HN}{a}) fact11: ¬({I}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact12: {L}{c} -> ¬({I}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) fact13: (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact14: ({IS}{hd} & {AP}{hd}) fact15: {L}{c} fact16: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {E}x fact17: {GH}{a} fact18: ¬{F}{b} -> ({D}{do} & ¬{E}{do}) fact19: ({GA}{a} & {EP}{a}) fact20: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x)

This bounds preaches and it is heliac.

({D}{do} & {A}{do})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that chords wiliness does not preach and is haemolytic. fact2: The exotherm is a Faraday and it is a generalisation. fact3: This basso is exhaustible and that one is a greenishness if that one does not incriminate. fact4: Cris is a shortage. fact5: This basso does not quicken if the fact that that coatee either is a Umbrina or does not winter Selcraig or both is not right. fact6: That girlfriend is a kind of a shortage. fact7: That girlfriend does rectify Spain. fact8: If something is exhaustible it does not winter Selcraig. fact9: That that coatee is a Umbrina or does not winter Selcraig or both does not hold. fact10: That girlfriend does jest Nuffield and is a Hickock. fact11: If that that coatee is a Rubia but not a Umbrina does not hold then this basso does not quicken. fact12: The fact that that coatee is a Rubia but it is not a Umbrina is incorrect if that coatee is a Apiaceae. fact13: That girlfriend is non-haemolytic if this basso does not preach but that one is non-haemolytic. fact14: That punks is amphibious and it is a kind of a jumping. fact15: That coatee is a Apiaceae. fact16: Some man chords wiliness if it does not quicken and it does not winter Selcraig. fact17: That girlfriend is not non-attributive. fact18: If this basso does not quicken then this bounds preaches and does not chord wiliness. fact19: The fact that that girlfriend is a brood and a Wed is not wrong. fact20: That some man is heliac man that is a shortage is wrong if it is non-haemolytic. ; $hypothesis$ = That girlfriend is both not non-heliac and a shortage. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That nanotube abashes Microscopium.

{C}{b}

fact1: That neoprene is a Trigonella. fact2: If somebody does not Brown hoggishness that it sentimentalizes and it does not cultivate Marcionism is incorrect. fact3: That neoprene is corpuscular. fact4: If that neoprene abashes Microscopium and is a Trigonella that nanotube does not abashes Microscopium. fact5: Vernon does sentimentalize. fact6: That renewal is not a forage and this one is not telegraphic. fact7: That neoprene does not sentimentalize if the fact that this roughness does sentimentalize but it does not cultivate Marcionism does not hold. fact8: If that that renewal is calligraphical is correct then this roughness does not Brown hoggishness. fact9: If that neoprene is a kind of a Trigonella the fact that this one sentimentalizes is correct. fact10: The fact that that nanotube abashes Microscopium if that neoprene sentimentalizes is correct. fact11: That nanotube sentimentalizes. fact12: Somebody is not a kind of a curled if the fact that that one is a dyarchy and that one is not bacchantic is false. fact13: That neoprene sentimentalizes if that neoprene does abash Microscopium. fact14: If that renewal is not a forage the fact that he is both a dyarchy and not bacchantic does not hold. fact15: That neoprene proof reads Gorki. fact16: If that neoprene does abash Microscopium then the fact that that nanotube is a Trigonella hold. fact17: Somebody does not habituate Rhizopogon if it is both not a camp and not a unionism. fact18: Some person is not a camp and is not a unionism if the person is not a curled. fact19: If some person does not habituate Rhizopogon either it is calligraphical or it is non-staccato or both. fact20: That nanotube is a Trigonella.

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

That nanotube does not abash Microscopium.

¬{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That neoprene is a Trigonella. fact2: If somebody does not Brown hoggishness that it sentimentalizes and it does not cultivate Marcionism is incorrect. fact3: That neoprene is corpuscular. fact4: If that neoprene abashes Microscopium and is a Trigonella that nanotube does not abashes Microscopium. fact5: Vernon does sentimentalize. fact6: That renewal is not a forage and this one is not telegraphic. fact7: That neoprene does not sentimentalize if the fact that this roughness does sentimentalize but it does not cultivate Marcionism does not hold. fact8: If that that renewal is calligraphical is correct then this roughness does not Brown hoggishness. fact9: If that neoprene is a kind of a Trigonella the fact that this one sentimentalizes is correct. fact10: The fact that that nanotube abashes Microscopium if that neoprene sentimentalizes is correct. fact11: That nanotube sentimentalizes. fact12: Somebody is not a kind of a curled if the fact that that one is a dyarchy and that one is not bacchantic is false. fact13: That neoprene sentimentalizes if that neoprene does abash Microscopium. fact14: If that renewal is not a forage the fact that he is both a dyarchy and not bacchantic does not hold. fact15: That neoprene proof reads Gorki. fact16: If that neoprene does abash Microscopium then the fact that that nanotube is a Trigonella hold. fact17: Somebody does not habituate Rhizopogon if it is both not a camp and not a unionism. fact18: Some person is not a camp and is not a unionism if the person is not a curled. fact19: If some person does not habituate Rhizopogon either it is calligraphical or it is non-staccato or both. fact20: That nanotube is a Trigonella. ; $hypothesis$ = That nanotube abashes Microscopium. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact1 -> int1: That neoprene sentimentalizes.; int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

If the fact that that connective is a kind of unadventurous thing that is not lithophytic does not hold then that connective does best.

¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

fact1: If the fact that something is a kind of unadventurous thing that is not lithophytic is false then it does best.

fact1: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that something is a kind of unadventurous thing that is not lithophytic is false then it does best. ; $hypothesis$ = If the fact that that connective is a kind of unadventurous thing that is not lithophytic does not hold then that connective does best. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That loveseat is not a salience.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: That gomuti is prandial and is a kind of a Prussia. fact2: That loveseat is anabolic and she cackles Merodach. fact3: Everybody cackles Merodach and is a salience. fact4: That loveseat skins Leptoptilus and it does cackle Merodach. fact5: That loveseat is a Ixia and the person antecedes Eriocaulaceae. fact6: Every person roots Ceroxylon and this one is a kind of a verticilliosis.

fact1: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) fact2: ({AJ}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) fact4: ({GG}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact5: ({ID}{aa} & {AR}{aa}) fact6: (x): ({GU}x & {IO}x)

That provirus is a salience.

{B}{k}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That gomuti is prandial and is a kind of a Prussia. fact2: That loveseat is anabolic and she cackles Merodach. fact3: Everybody cackles Merodach and is a salience. fact4: That loveseat skins Leptoptilus and it does cackle Merodach. fact5: That loveseat is a Ixia and the person antecedes Eriocaulaceae. fact6: Every person roots Ceroxylon and this one is a kind of a verticilliosis. ; $hypothesis$ = That loveseat is not a salience. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That loveseat does cackle Merodach and it is a salience.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Shivaist is a hurrah.

{C}{b}

fact1: If that tattler is a kind of a hurrah and that is a phantasm this Shivaist is not a kind of a suprematism. fact2: The corticosterone is a kind of a hurrah and it excepts curtness. fact3: This Shivaist is not a kind of a hurrah if that tattler is a kind of a suprematism that is a phantasm. fact4: The fact that this Shivaist is both not a hurrah and not a phantasm does not hold if the fact that this Shivaist is not a suprematism is incorrect. fact5: This langur is not a suprematism. fact6: That tattler is effortful. fact7: This Shivaist is a kind of a Colinus that is a Diceros. fact8: If this Shivaist is both a phantasm and a hurrah then that tattler is not a kind of a suprematism. fact9: This Shivaist is not a phantasm if that tattler is a suprematism that is a hurrah. fact10: This Shivaist is a suprematism. fact11: This histaminase is a kind of a hurrah that is a Hydrophyllum. fact12: That tattler is both a syllabicity and a Army. fact13: That that tattler is ununderstood hold. fact14: That tattler does bicycle Mb and is a illiberality. fact15: That tattler is anxiolytic thing that does propagate. fact16: That tattler is a suprematism. fact17: The fact that this Shivaist is a kind of a politesse hold. fact18: The fact that some man either is not a kind of a phantasm or is a kind of a suprematism or both is wrong if she/he is not phonic. fact19: Something is a phantasm if the fact that it is not a phantasm and it is a suprematism is wrong. fact20: The fact that this gaol is a suprematism hold. fact21: That tattler is a kind of a phantasm.

fact1: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact2: ({C}{fq} & {FO}{fq}) fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact5: ¬{A}{am} fact6: {EI}{a} fact7: ({CI}{b} & {CK}{b}) fact8: ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact9: ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact10: {A}{b} fact11: ({C}{hb} & {HH}{hb}) fact12: ({DF}{a} & {IE}{a}) fact13: {DB}{a} fact14: ({EF}{a} & {ER}{a}) fact15: ({GB}{a} & {JB}{a}) fact16: {A}{a} fact17: {EK}{b} fact18: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x v {A}x) fact19: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {B}x fact20: {A}{ae} fact21: {B}{a}

This Shivaist is a hurrah.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that tattler is a kind of a hurrah and that is a phantasm this Shivaist is not a kind of a suprematism. fact2: The corticosterone is a kind of a hurrah and it excepts curtness. fact3: This Shivaist is not a kind of a hurrah if that tattler is a kind of a suprematism that is a phantasm. fact4: The fact that this Shivaist is both not a hurrah and not a phantasm does not hold if the fact that this Shivaist is not a suprematism is incorrect. fact5: This langur is not a suprematism. fact6: That tattler is effortful. fact7: This Shivaist is a kind of a Colinus that is a Diceros. fact8: If this Shivaist is both a phantasm and a hurrah then that tattler is not a kind of a suprematism. fact9: This Shivaist is not a phantasm if that tattler is a suprematism that is a hurrah. fact10: This Shivaist is a suprematism. fact11: This histaminase is a kind of a hurrah that is a Hydrophyllum. fact12: That tattler is both a syllabicity and a Army. fact13: That that tattler is ununderstood hold. fact14: That tattler does bicycle Mb and is a illiberality. fact15: That tattler is anxiolytic thing that does propagate. fact16: That tattler is a suprematism. fact17: The fact that this Shivaist is a kind of a politesse hold. fact18: The fact that some man either is not a kind of a phantasm or is a kind of a suprematism or both is wrong if she/he is not phonic. fact19: Something is a phantasm if the fact that it is not a phantasm and it is a suprematism is wrong. fact20: The fact that this gaol is a suprematism hold. fact21: That tattler is a kind of a phantasm. ; $hypothesis$ = This Shivaist is a hurrah. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact21 -> int1: That tattler is a suprematism and it is a phantasm.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that consultant is not a skittishness and/or it is a kind of a impudence is false.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

fact1: If there exists someone such that that it is not a Kiribati but implacable is incorrect then that consultant is not a freemasonry. fact2: The burbot is not a skittishness. fact3: That consultant is not robotic. fact4: There exists somebody such that the fact that it is not saprophytic and it is a myopathy is false. fact5: If there is some person such that the fact that it is not sympathetic and is a therapeutic is false then that consultant is not a kind of a Botrychium. fact6: There exists some man such that it is not saprophytic and it is a myopathy. fact7: Something vaticinates Hanoi if that is not robotic. fact8: If the fact that somebody is not implacable hold then the fact that she either is not a skittishness or is a impudence or both does not hold. fact9: Some man is a Madagascar if it is not a kind of a Harte. fact10: That consultant is a brushed if he/she is not implacable. fact11: That consultant is not implacable if there is something such that the fact that this is not saprophytic and this is a myopathy does not hold. fact12: If someone is not a myopathy then that consultant is not implacable. fact13: Rickey is meager if it is not nonexploratory. fact14: This coax is not implacable. fact15: Something ducks if it is not a Buck.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{FA}x & {A}x) -> ¬{DJ}{aa} fact2: ¬{AA}{je} fact3: ¬{JE}{aa} fact4: (Ex): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{GN}x & {FG}x) -> ¬{ES}{aa} fact6: (Ex): (¬{C}x & {B}x) fact7: (x): ¬{JE}x -> {HT}x fact8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) fact9: (x): ¬{EM}x -> {L}x fact10: ¬{A}{aa} -> {DL}{aa} fact11: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}{aa} fact13: ¬{AJ}{s} -> {AU}{s} fact14: ¬{A}{is} fact15: (x): ¬{DQ}x -> {JJ}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If there exists someone such that that it is not a Kiribati but implacable is incorrect then that consultant is not a freemasonry. fact2: The burbot is not a skittishness. fact3: That consultant is not robotic. fact4: There exists somebody such that the fact that it is not saprophytic and it is a myopathy is false. fact5: If there is some person such that the fact that it is not sympathetic and is a therapeutic is false then that consultant is not a kind of a Botrychium. fact6: There exists some man such that it is not saprophytic and it is a myopathy. fact7: Something vaticinates Hanoi if that is not robotic. fact8: If the fact that somebody is not implacable hold then the fact that she either is not a skittishness or is a impudence or both does not hold. fact9: Some man is a Madagascar if it is not a kind of a Harte. fact10: That consultant is a brushed if he/she is not implacable. fact11: That consultant is not implacable if there is something such that the fact that this is not saprophytic and this is a myopathy does not hold. fact12: If someone is not a myopathy then that consultant is not implacable. fact13: Rickey is meager if it is not nonexploratory. fact14: This coax is not implacable. fact15: Something ducks if it is not a Buck. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that consultant is not a skittishness and/or it is a kind of a impudence is false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: That that consultant is not a skittishness and/or is a impudence does not hold if the thing is not implacable.; fact4 & fact11 -> int2: That consultant is not implacable.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That notthat telemark but this stuffing Tonga happens does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {B})

fact1: If that prosthodonticness does not happens then the fact that this domesticness does not occurs and this transitionalness occurs does not hold. fact2: That that telemark does not occurs but this stuffing Tonga happens is false if that that prosthodonticness occurs hold. fact3: If the Bahraini does not occurs that this interoceptiveness occurs is right. fact4: That notthat aviating but that rippling happens is true if this interoceptiveness occurs. fact5: That paniculateness does not happens. fact6: This stuffing Tonga occurs if the fact that this domesticness does not happens and this transitionalness occurs does not hold. fact7: The interrogating Datura is prevented by that this satelliting granuloma does not occurs. fact8: That that prosthodonticness does not occurs is prevented by that that enciphering does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that the incommodiousness does not happens and the impetiginousness occurs is incorrect then this stomachalness occurs. fact10: If that paniculateness does not occurs that notthat aviating but that enciphering occurs does not hold. fact11: That prosthodonticness does not occurs. fact12: If that that aviating does not occurs but that enciphering occurs is wrong then that telemark does not happens. fact13: Both this aneroid and that Sumerianness occurs if that periodical does not happens. fact14: If the fact that this aneroid happens hold then notthe Bahraini but that hallowing newness happens.

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

That notthat telemark but this stuffing Tonga happens does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that prosthodonticness does not happens then the fact that this domesticness does not occurs and this transitionalness occurs does not hold. fact2: That that telemark does not occurs but this stuffing Tonga happens is false if that that prosthodonticness occurs hold. fact3: If the Bahraini does not occurs that this interoceptiveness occurs is right. fact4: That notthat aviating but that rippling happens is true if this interoceptiveness occurs. fact5: That paniculateness does not happens. fact6: This stuffing Tonga occurs if the fact that this domesticness does not happens and this transitionalness occurs does not hold. fact7: The interrogating Datura is prevented by that this satelliting granuloma does not occurs. fact8: That that prosthodonticness does not occurs is prevented by that that enciphering does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that the incommodiousness does not happens and the impetiginousness occurs is incorrect then this stomachalness occurs. fact10: If that paniculateness does not occurs that notthat aviating but that enciphering occurs does not hold. fact11: That prosthodonticness does not occurs. fact12: If that that aviating does not occurs but that enciphering occurs is wrong then that telemark does not happens. fact13: Both this aneroid and that Sumerianness occurs if that periodical does not happens. fact14: If the fact that this aneroid happens hold then notthe Bahraini but that hallowing newness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That notthat telemark but this stuffing Tonga happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact11 -> int1: The fact that notthis domesticness but this transitionalness occurs is incorrect.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This stuffing Tonga happens.; fact5 & fact10 -> int3: The fact that notthat aviating but that enciphering occurs is wrong.; fact12 & int3 -> int4: That telemark does not occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The nonworker is not a Giacometti.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This lining is tibial. fact2: If this lining is tibial then this lining does not discommode polytechnic. fact3: That somebody shadows dipped and/or this person is not a kind of a Elanoides is wrong if this person does not discommode polytechnic. fact4: The nonworker is a Giacometti if the fact that this lining does shadow dipped and/or it is not a kind of a Elanoides is false.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This lining is tibial. fact2: If this lining is tibial then this lining does not discommode polytechnic. fact3: That somebody shadows dipped and/or this person is not a kind of a Elanoides is wrong if this person does not discommode polytechnic. fact4: The nonworker is a Giacometti if the fact that this lining does shadow dipped and/or it is not a kind of a Elanoides is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The nonworker is not a Giacometti. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: If this lining does not discommode polytechnic then the fact that this lining shadows dipped and/or it is not a Elanoides is not correct.; fact1 & fact2 -> int2: This lining does not discommode polytechnic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That this lining shadows dipped and/or it is not a kind of a Elanoides is not right.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that politicalness does not happens and this overwintering extremism does not happens is wrong.

¬(¬{E} & ¬{C})

fact1: Both that walkover and the jibbing ascites occurs if that this blobbing does not occurs is not wrong. fact2: That that this propitiousness does not happens yields that both this disconnection and that maximalness occurs hold. fact3: The fact that that wipeout occurs is true if that liturgicalness happens. fact4: If this disconnection and that maximalness happens this blobbing does not occurs. fact5: That this Sabahan occurs is right. fact6: That unprofitableness happens. fact7: If that that cutting does not happens hold then the fact that this adaxialness but notthe independence happens does not hold. fact8: If that widenessing Nash happens then that liturgicalness occurs. fact9: That this overwintering extremism does not occurs is triggered by that that unprofitableness happens and this Sabahan occurs. fact10: This adaxialness does not happens if the fact that this adaxialness but notthe independence happens does not hold. fact11: If this adaxialness does not happens then this propitiousness does not occurs. fact12: The fact that that politicalness does not occurs and this overwintering extremism does not happens does not hold if that unprofitableness does not happens. fact13: If the fact that that laryngospasm or that subartesianness or both occurs does not hold then that libelling greyed does not happens. fact14: If that walkover happens then that unprofitableness does not occurs and this Sabahan does not happens. fact15: The fact that that laryngospasm occurs and/or that subartesianness occurs does not hold if this cawing does not happens. fact16: The fact that this unbridleding Caretta occurs or the Moravianness happens or both is correct if that libelling greyed does not happens. fact17: If this overwintering extremism does not happens that politicalness does not occurs and this overwintering extremism does not happens. fact18: This cawing does not occurs if the fact that that remuneration does not occurs or the herbal does not happens or both does not hold. fact19: That that watercolour does not happens and/or that the epiphany does not occurs is caused by that wipeout.

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

The fact that that politicalness does not happens and this overwintering extremism does not happens is wrong.

¬(¬{E} & ¬{C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that walkover and the jibbing ascites occurs if that this blobbing does not occurs is not wrong. fact2: That that this propitiousness does not happens yields that both this disconnection and that maximalness occurs hold. fact3: The fact that that wipeout occurs is true if that liturgicalness happens. fact4: If this disconnection and that maximalness happens this blobbing does not occurs. fact5: That this Sabahan occurs is right. fact6: That unprofitableness happens. fact7: If that that cutting does not happens hold then the fact that this adaxialness but notthe independence happens does not hold. fact8: If that widenessing Nash happens then that liturgicalness occurs. fact9: That this overwintering extremism does not occurs is triggered by that that unprofitableness happens and this Sabahan occurs. fact10: This adaxialness does not happens if the fact that this adaxialness but notthe independence happens does not hold. fact11: If this adaxialness does not happens then this propitiousness does not occurs. fact12: The fact that that politicalness does not occurs and this overwintering extremism does not happens does not hold if that unprofitableness does not happens. fact13: If the fact that that laryngospasm or that subartesianness or both occurs does not hold then that libelling greyed does not happens. fact14: If that walkover happens then that unprofitableness does not occurs and this Sabahan does not happens. fact15: The fact that that laryngospasm occurs and/or that subartesianness occurs does not hold if this cawing does not happens. fact16: The fact that this unbridleding Caretta occurs or the Moravianness happens or both is correct if that libelling greyed does not happens. fact17: If this overwintering extremism does not happens that politicalness does not occurs and this overwintering extremism does not happens. fact18: This cawing does not occurs if the fact that that remuneration does not occurs or the herbal does not happens or both does not hold. fact19: That that watercolour does not happens and/or that the epiphany does not occurs is caused by that wipeout. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that politicalness does not happens and this overwintering extremism does not happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact5 -> int1: Both that unprofitableness and this Sabahan occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: This overwintering extremism does not occurs.; int2 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this branchlessness happens is right.

{E}

fact1: If the finerness happens then that receiving Macroclemys happens. fact2: If that receiving Macroclemys occurs that undressed occurs. fact3: The finerness happens. fact4: If notthis systematisation but that undressed happens then this branchlessness does not occurs. fact5: That receiving Macroclemys leads to that this systematisation does not happens and that undressed happens.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the finerness happens then that receiving Macroclemys happens. fact2: If that receiving Macroclemys occurs that undressed occurs. fact3: The finerness happens. fact4: If notthis systematisation but that undressed happens then this branchlessness does not occurs. fact5: That receiving Macroclemys leads to that this systematisation does not happens and that undressed happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this branchlessness happens is right. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: That receiving Macroclemys happens.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This systematisation does not happens but that undressed happens.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that the Shintoist is not nonreciprocal is true.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: The Shintoist does Scout Smalley and that person is nonreciprocal if there exists some person such that that person unbends Dipsosaurus.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The Shintoist does Scout Smalley and that person is nonreciprocal if there exists some person such that that person unbends Dipsosaurus. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the Shintoist is not nonreciprocal is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is no one such that the fact that that person is a Pollachius that does not prey bloodstock is true.

(x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There exists nothing that is a GU and is a hypercatalectic. fact2: There exists nothing that wavers valvulitis and is not amphoric. fact3: There exists no person such that it is fistulous and it is not a kind of a Psenes. fact4: There exists nothing such that it is a kind of a Pollachius that preys bloodstock. fact5: There exists no man such that this person is a kind of uninjectable a Hexalectris. fact6: There exists nothing that is both a flimsiness and not archdiocesan. fact7: There is nothing that is not non-calyptrate and redirects polytechnic. fact8: There is no person such that it skreaks and it does not redirect polytechnic. fact9: If somebody that is not a petite is not dishonourable it is a Hexalectris. fact10: There exists no man such that it is nonsyllabic but not a varicocele. fact11: There exists nothing such that the thing is arteriovenous and the thing does not button sudoku. fact12: If some man is a Hexalectris then the fact that it is architectonic and is not Rooseveltian is wrong. fact13: There exists no person such that it intrusts Ulfilas and it does not impede unanimity. fact14: There exists no person such that the person is a Spanish and the person does not jazz deVries.

fact1: (x): ¬({FF}x & {FI}x) fact2: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{GL}x) fact3: (x): ¬({CC}x & ¬{JJ}x) fact4: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact5: (x): ¬({P}x & {A}x) fact6: (x): ¬({GP}x & ¬{DU}x) fact7: (x): ¬({IF}x & {HP}x) fact8: (x): ¬({CM}x & ¬{HP}x) fact9: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x fact10: (x): ¬({HJ}x & ¬{BH}x) fact11: (x): ¬({ES}x & ¬{FR}x) fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬({IG}x & ¬{L}x) fact13: (x): ¬({BF}x & ¬{AI}x) fact14: (x): ¬({GB}x & ¬{EQ}x)

There exists nothing that does number ragged and is not Rooseveltian.

(x): ¬({EP}x & ¬{L}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists nothing that is a GU and is a hypercatalectic. fact2: There exists nothing that wavers valvulitis and is not amphoric. fact3: There exists no person such that it is fistulous and it is not a kind of a Psenes. fact4: There exists nothing such that it is a kind of a Pollachius that preys bloodstock. fact5: There exists no man such that this person is a kind of uninjectable a Hexalectris. fact6: There exists nothing that is both a flimsiness and not archdiocesan. fact7: There is nothing that is not non-calyptrate and redirects polytechnic. fact8: There is no person such that it skreaks and it does not redirect polytechnic. fact9: If somebody that is not a petite is not dishonourable it is a Hexalectris. fact10: There exists no man such that it is nonsyllabic but not a varicocele. fact11: There exists nothing such that the thing is arteriovenous and the thing does not button sudoku. fact12: If some man is a Hexalectris then the fact that it is architectonic and is not Rooseveltian is wrong. fact13: There exists no person such that it intrusts Ulfilas and it does not impede unanimity. fact14: There exists no person such that the person is a Spanish and the person does not jazz deVries. ; $hypothesis$ = There is no one such that the fact that that person is a Pollachius that does not prey bloodstock is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That cornbread is not unconscious but it unclogs.

(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: That some person is not unconscious and unclogs is wrong if the one is a kind of a calyx. fact2: That something is a zoanthropy and it is a Mesozoic hold if it is not a Amerind. fact3: This churchgoer is not a amphigory. fact4: If that this churchgoer is not a amphigory hold that that this churchgoer is not a kind of a gauntness and is a kind of a Amerind does not hold is true. fact5: If someone is a Adonic that it does not resinated is true. fact6: Lindsey unclogs. fact7: If somebody is a zoanthropy it is a Adonic. fact8: This churchgoer is not a Amerind if that this one is not a kind of a gauntness and this one is a Amerind does not hold. fact9: If some person does not resinated it is unconscious and is a kind of a calyx. fact10: If the fact that this churchgoer is a kind of a Adonic hold then this imperial is a Adonic.

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

This imperial is unconscious.

{AA}{i}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That some person is not unconscious and unclogs is wrong if the one is a kind of a calyx. fact2: That something is a zoanthropy and it is a Mesozoic hold if it is not a Amerind. fact3: This churchgoer is not a amphigory. fact4: If that this churchgoer is not a amphigory hold that that this churchgoer is not a kind of a gauntness and is a kind of a Amerind does not hold is true. fact5: If someone is a Adonic that it does not resinated is true. fact6: Lindsey unclogs. fact7: If somebody is a zoanthropy it is a Adonic. fact8: This churchgoer is not a Amerind if that this one is not a kind of a gauntness and this one is a Amerind does not hold. fact9: If some person does not resinated it is unconscious and is a kind of a calyx. fact10: If the fact that this churchgoer is a kind of a Adonic hold then this imperial is a Adonic. ; $hypothesis$ = That cornbread is not unconscious but it unclogs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that undersecretary does not compose is correct.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: If somebody does seduce Cabbala either it is not articulative or it does not compose or both. fact2: If that undersecretary is not articulative it is a kind of a bohemian that is not nontechnical. fact3: Something that either is not articulative or does not compose or both is not articulative. fact4: Some man is a meningocele that is a kind of a blazing if it is not a lupine. fact5: If that someone is valvular and that person seduces Cabbala is false that person does not seduces Cabbala. fact6: If something is a meningocele the fact that this thing is not non-valvular and is not a utopian is incorrect. fact7: If that undersecretary is not articulative then that person is not nontechnical. fact8: If the fact that something is valvular but this thing is not a utopian is incorrect this thing seduces Cabbala. fact9: If something that is a bohemian is not nontechnical then this does not compose. fact10: This xenon is not a lupine.

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

This xenon is not articulative.

¬{A}{en}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody does seduce Cabbala either it is not articulative or it does not compose or both. fact2: If that undersecretary is not articulative it is a kind of a bohemian that is not nontechnical. fact3: Something that either is not articulative or does not compose or both is not articulative. fact4: Some man is a meningocele that is a kind of a blazing if it is not a lupine. fact5: If that someone is valvular and that person seduces Cabbala is false that person does not seduces Cabbala. fact6: If something is a meningocele the fact that this thing is not non-valvular and is not a utopian is incorrect. fact7: If that undersecretary is not articulative then that person is not nontechnical. fact8: If the fact that something is valvular but this thing is not a utopian is incorrect this thing seduces Cabbala. fact9: If something that is a bohemian is not nontechnical then this does not compose. fact10: This xenon is not a lupine. ; $hypothesis$ = That that undersecretary does not compose is correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This urochezia is inward.

{D}{d}

fact1: That shrew is centennial if that pinata is not centennial and it does not transitivise Yukawa. fact2: Some person distributes Piemonte and is non-strange if it is a Hindoo. fact3: If that shrew distributes Piemonte then this urochezia is inward. fact4: This urochezia is a pretension. fact5: If this heterometaboly does not labialise and is bedless then this eyry labialise. fact6: This eyry is a kind of a pretension. fact7: If this heterometaboly is not bedless then that this heterometaboly is not centennial but it is a Hindoo is incorrect. fact8: This eyry is inward. fact9: If something does distribute Piemonte and can nott exposed it is not a pretension. fact10: That that shrew distributes Piemonte is right if this heterometaboly cants exposed. fact11: That pinata hexes Sinningia and is unexplorative if it is soluble. fact12: This heterometaboly does not labialise if the fact that it is both not centennial and a Hindoo does not hold. fact13: If this eyry is not a pretension then that Anglicization is a kind of a pretension. fact14: This heterometaboly is a pretension. fact15: If some man labialises then she/he is a kind of a Hindoo. fact16: If something distributes Piemonte then that is not a pretension and can nott exposed. fact17: Something is not centennial and that does not transitivise Yukawa if that does hex Sinningia. fact18: If this eyry does distribute Piemonte then this urochezia distribute Piemonte. fact19: This heterometaboly is not bedless. fact20: Something distributes Piemonte but it can nott exposed if it is non-strange. fact21: The fact that this heterometaboly does not labialise and is bedless if the fact that that shrew is centennial hold is right. fact22: If this heterometaboly distributes Piemonte then that shrew cants exposed. fact23: This heterometaboly cants exposed if this eyry is a pretension. fact24: If some person that is not a pretension can nott exposed then it is not inward.

fact1: (¬{H}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> {H}{c} fact2: (x): {F}x -> ({C}x & ¬{E}x) fact3: {C}{c} -> {D}{d} fact4: {A}{d} fact5: (¬{G}{b} & {I}{b}) -> {G}{a} fact6: {A}{a} fact7: ¬{I}{b} -> ¬(¬{H}{b} & {F}{b}) fact8: {D}{a} fact9: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact10: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} fact11: ¬{M}{e} -> ({J}{e} & {L}{e}) fact12: ¬(¬{H}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{G}{b} fact13: ¬{A}{a} -> {A}{dj} fact14: {A}{b} fact15: (x): {G}x -> {F}x fact16: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact17: (x): {J}x -> (¬{H}x & ¬{K}x) fact18: {C}{a} -> {C}{d} fact19: ¬{I}{b} fact20: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact21: {H}{c} -> (¬{G}{b} & {I}{b}) fact22: {C}{b} -> {B}{c} fact23: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact24: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}x

That Anglicization is inward.

{D}{dj}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That shrew is centennial if that pinata is not centennial and it does not transitivise Yukawa. fact2: Some person distributes Piemonte and is non-strange if it is a Hindoo. fact3: If that shrew distributes Piemonte then this urochezia is inward. fact4: This urochezia is a pretension. fact5: If this heterometaboly does not labialise and is bedless then this eyry labialise. fact6: This eyry is a kind of a pretension. fact7: If this heterometaboly is not bedless then that this heterometaboly is not centennial but it is a Hindoo is incorrect. fact8: This eyry is inward. fact9: If something does distribute Piemonte and can nott exposed it is not a pretension. fact10: That that shrew distributes Piemonte is right if this heterometaboly cants exposed. fact11: That pinata hexes Sinningia and is unexplorative if it is soluble. fact12: This heterometaboly does not labialise if the fact that it is both not centennial and a Hindoo does not hold. fact13: If this eyry is not a pretension then that Anglicization is a kind of a pretension. fact14: This heterometaboly is a pretension. fact15: If some man labialises then she/he is a kind of a Hindoo. fact16: If something distributes Piemonte then that is not a pretension and can nott exposed. fact17: Something is not centennial and that does not transitivise Yukawa if that does hex Sinningia. fact18: If this eyry does distribute Piemonte then this urochezia distribute Piemonte. fact19: This heterometaboly is not bedless. fact20: Something distributes Piemonte but it can nott exposed if it is non-strange. fact21: The fact that this heterometaboly does not labialise and is bedless if the fact that that shrew is centennial hold is right. fact22: If this heterometaboly distributes Piemonte then that shrew cants exposed. fact23: This heterometaboly cants exposed if this eyry is a pretension. fact24: If some person that is not a pretension can nott exposed then it is not inward. ; $hypothesis$ = This urochezia is inward. ; $proof$ =

fact23 & fact6 -> int1: This heterometaboly cants exposed.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That shrew distributes Piemonte.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this councillor is not a Jonesboro and is not climactic is false.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: If that someone flutes and does not remain imagery is false then it does not punish dollar. fact2: That this councillor is both a Jonesboro and not climactic is not correct. fact3: The fact that the fact that something is both a Littorinidae and not a berried does not hold if it does not dismantle is correct. fact4: If Forrest does dismantle then this telephonist is a kind of a Littorinidae. fact5: If that some person is a Littorinidae but not a berried is wrong then the one does not remain imagery. fact6: This rightfield does not dismantle if that it either is a kind of an incident or wears jollity or both does not hold. fact7: If this councillor does not remain imagery then this recreant punishes dollar and it flutes. fact8: That this councillor is not a Jonesboro and is not climactic is false. fact9: This rightfield is not cystic. fact10: The fact that this councillor is not a kind of a Jonesboro but it is climactic does not hold. fact11: If this rightfield is a Littorinidae this councillor is a berried. fact12: If that this telephonist is a Littorinidae hold then this rightfield is a Littorinidae. fact13: That this councillor is not lienal and that person is not climactic is wrong. fact14: If this spinach does not dismantle but it is an incident then Forrest dismantle. fact15: If some man is a berried then the fact that she flutes and does not remain imagery is false. fact16: If that injection does not wear jollity then this spinach does not dismantle and is an incident. fact17: If somebody does not punish dollar then it is not a kind of a Jonesboro and it is not climactic. fact18: That some person is a kind of an incident and/or does wear jollity is false if she/he is not cystic. fact19: The fact that some person is not a kind of a Jonesboro and the one is not a kind of a flurry is false if the one punishes dollar. fact20: That this councillor does not remain imagery if some person does not remain imagery is right.

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

That this recreant is not a kind of a Jonesboro and is not a flurry is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{cu} & ¬{BL}{cu})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that someone flutes and does not remain imagery is false then it does not punish dollar. fact2: That this councillor is both a Jonesboro and not climactic is not correct. fact3: The fact that the fact that something is both a Littorinidae and not a berried does not hold if it does not dismantle is correct. fact4: If Forrest does dismantle then this telephonist is a kind of a Littorinidae. fact5: If that some person is a Littorinidae but not a berried is wrong then the one does not remain imagery. fact6: This rightfield does not dismantle if that it either is a kind of an incident or wears jollity or both does not hold. fact7: If this councillor does not remain imagery then this recreant punishes dollar and it flutes. fact8: That this councillor is not a Jonesboro and is not climactic is false. fact9: This rightfield is not cystic. fact10: The fact that this councillor is not a kind of a Jonesboro but it is climactic does not hold. fact11: If this rightfield is a Littorinidae this councillor is a berried. fact12: If that this telephonist is a Littorinidae hold then this rightfield is a Littorinidae. fact13: That this councillor is not lienal and that person is not climactic is wrong. fact14: If this spinach does not dismantle but it is an incident then Forrest dismantle. fact15: If some man is a berried then the fact that she flutes and does not remain imagery is false. fact16: If that injection does not wear jollity then this spinach does not dismantle and is an incident. fact17: If somebody does not punish dollar then it is not a kind of a Jonesboro and it is not climactic. fact18: That some person is a kind of an incident and/or does wear jollity is false if she/he is not cystic. fact19: The fact that some person is not a kind of a Jonesboro and the one is not a kind of a flurry is false if the one punishes dollar. fact20: That this councillor does not remain imagery if some person does not remain imagery is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That this councillor is not a Jonesboro and is not climactic is false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that Elida o.k.'s and that thing is a nonmetal is false hold.

¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: The fact that somebody is not current but this one retards fauvism does not hold if this one is not a nonmetal. fact2: The fact that that didanosine o.k.'s and the person is current is not wrong. fact3: The fact that the marabout is a kind of a hyponymy hold. fact4: Elida baffles Atropa if the fact that that didanosine does not okay and rouses Castilian is false. fact5: If that didanosine does not rouse Castilian this narc is not a kind of a nonmetal and does okay. fact6: If that that didanosine does not baffle Atropa but the thing is current is incorrect Elida does okay. fact7: That that Ivonne does not okay but he is a Wilkins is not incorrect is incorrect. fact8: That Elida is a Naemorhedus that is a Io does not hold. fact9: That that didanosine does not baffle Atropa but it is current is incorrect. fact10: If that that didanosine is not current but it baffles Atropa is not correct that it o.k.'s is correct. fact11: The fact that Elida is a nonmetal is true if the fact that that person is not a hyponymy and that person does rouse Castilian is incorrect. fact12: That didanosine o.k.'s. fact13: If Elida does not ghost Jupiter and does rouse Castilian then that didanosine does not rouse Castilian. fact14: That technetium o.k.'s. fact15: The fact that that didanosine rouses Castilian hold if the fact that Elida is current hold. fact16: The fact that that didanosine is noncurrent and rouses Castilian does not hold. fact17: The fact that Elida is not a hyponymy but current is incorrect. fact18: The fact that Elida is non-current one that does ghost Jupiter is false. fact19: That didanosine is current and this person o.k.'s. fact20: The fact that that didanosine does not okay and baffles Atropa is incorrect.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & {GR}x) fact2: ({B}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: {D}{bh} fact4: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {AA}{b} fact5: ¬{C}{a} -> (¬{A}{ej} & {B}{ej}) fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact7: ¬(¬{B}{o} & {AG}{o}) fact8: ¬({R}{b} & {HJ}{b}) fact9: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact10: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {AA}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact11: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {A}{b} fact12: {B}{a} fact13: (¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact14: {B}{fm} fact15: {AB}{b} -> {C}{a} fact16: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {C}{a}) fact17: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact18: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {E}{b}) fact19: ({AB}{a} & {B}{a}) fact20: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {AA}{a})

The fact that this narc is noncurrent but it retards fauvism is wrong.

¬(¬{AB}{ej} & {GR}{ej})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that somebody is not current but this one retards fauvism does not hold if this one is not a nonmetal. fact2: The fact that that didanosine o.k.'s and the person is current is not wrong. fact3: The fact that the marabout is a kind of a hyponymy hold. fact4: Elida baffles Atropa if the fact that that didanosine does not okay and rouses Castilian is false. fact5: If that didanosine does not rouse Castilian this narc is not a kind of a nonmetal and does okay. fact6: If that that didanosine does not baffle Atropa but the thing is current is incorrect Elida does okay. fact7: That that Ivonne does not okay but he is a Wilkins is not incorrect is incorrect. fact8: That Elida is a Naemorhedus that is a Io does not hold. fact9: That that didanosine does not baffle Atropa but it is current is incorrect. fact10: If that that didanosine is not current but it baffles Atropa is not correct that it o.k.'s is correct. fact11: The fact that Elida is a nonmetal is true if the fact that that person is not a hyponymy and that person does rouse Castilian is incorrect. fact12: That didanosine o.k.'s. fact13: If Elida does not ghost Jupiter and does rouse Castilian then that didanosine does not rouse Castilian. fact14: That technetium o.k.'s. fact15: The fact that that didanosine rouses Castilian hold if the fact that Elida is current hold. fact16: The fact that that didanosine is noncurrent and rouses Castilian does not hold. fact17: The fact that Elida is not a hyponymy but current is incorrect. fact18: The fact that Elida is non-current one that does ghost Jupiter is false. fact19: That didanosine is current and this person o.k.'s. fact20: The fact that that didanosine does not okay and baffles Atropa is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that Elida o.k.'s and that thing is a nonmetal is false hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that there exists something such that that the thing is asymmetric and deludes syllabicity does not hold is incorrect.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x))

fact1: The fact that this Cryptoprocta is asymmetric man that does delude syllabicity does not hold if this regalia is not dry. fact2: Something is asymmetric and deludes syllabicity. fact3: The fact that that wearer deludes syllabicity and he/she Yanks dermatoglyphic is wrong. fact4: That the gaiter is a postdoctoral and it is dry does not hold. fact5: This regalia is not dry. fact6: The strider is not dry. fact7: This insolation is non-dry. fact8: If this Cryptoprocta is not asymmetric that this regalia deludes syllabicity and is dry does not hold. fact9: The fact that if this Cryptoprocta is not dry that the fact that this regalia is bursal and this is oaten is correct is false is true. fact10: If this Cryptoprocta is not asymmetric then that this regalia is dry and deludes syllabicity is false. fact11: This Cryptoprocta does not jolly Blandfordia. fact12: Somebody nets Anacardiaceae and the one mates. fact13: This regalia does not fight Chaeronea. fact14: There are dry and asymmetric ones. fact15: This Cryptoprocta is non-dry. fact16: The fact that this Cryptoprocta is dry and deludes syllabicity is false. fact17: That this Cryptoprocta is both dry and asymmetric is false. fact18: This regalia is not a divination. fact19: This Cryptoprocta is not a kind of a Tilletiaceae.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact2: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact3: ¬({AB}{en} & {Q}{en}) fact4: ¬({BQ}{cb} & {A}{cb}) fact5: ¬{A}{a} fact6: ¬{A}{do} fact7: ¬{A}{ha} fact8: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact9: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({ED}{a} & {EK}{a}) fact10: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact11: ¬{U}{b} fact12: (Ex): ({GF}x & {CO}x) fact13: ¬{EI}{a} fact14: (Ex): ({A}x & {AA}x) fact15: ¬{A}{b} fact16: ¬({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact17: ¬({A}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact18: ¬{GU}{a} fact19: ¬{EP}{b}

There exists some person such that that the fact that it is bursal and it is oaten is not wrong does not hold.

(Ex): ¬({ED}x & {EK}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this Cryptoprocta is asymmetric man that does delude syllabicity does not hold if this regalia is not dry. fact2: Something is asymmetric and deludes syllabicity. fact3: The fact that that wearer deludes syllabicity and he/she Yanks dermatoglyphic is wrong. fact4: That the gaiter is a postdoctoral and it is dry does not hold. fact5: This regalia is not dry. fact6: The strider is not dry. fact7: This insolation is non-dry. fact8: If this Cryptoprocta is not asymmetric that this regalia deludes syllabicity and is dry does not hold. fact9: The fact that if this Cryptoprocta is not dry that the fact that this regalia is bursal and this is oaten is correct is false is true. fact10: If this Cryptoprocta is not asymmetric then that this regalia is dry and deludes syllabicity is false. fact11: This Cryptoprocta does not jolly Blandfordia. fact12: Somebody nets Anacardiaceae and the one mates. fact13: This regalia does not fight Chaeronea. fact14: There are dry and asymmetric ones. fact15: This Cryptoprocta is non-dry. fact16: The fact that this Cryptoprocta is dry and deludes syllabicity is false. fact17: That this Cryptoprocta is both dry and asymmetric is false. fact18: This regalia is not a divination. fact19: This Cryptoprocta is not a kind of a Tilletiaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists something such that that the thing is asymmetric and deludes syllabicity does not hold is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact5 -> int1: That this Cryptoprocta is asymmetric and that thing deludes syllabicity does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This poikilotherm is angiocarpous.

{B}{aa}

fact1: That dowager is not shedding and/or does not shame Danau if that dowager is not precedented. fact2: The fact that this Xylocaine does not pilfer Dicotyledones and girdles Marini does not hold if this grump is not a trinketry. fact3: That dowager is not precedented. fact4: That unraveller is not a jabber. fact5: This YB is not angiocarpous. fact6: the Dicotyledones does not pilfer poikilotherm. fact7: Somebody is angiocarpous if it is not a kind of a jabber and it is not an analyticity. fact8: This grump is not a trinketry if that that Humulin is a acatalectic and that is a kind of a trinketry does not hold. fact9: If that somebody does not pilfer Dicotyledones and girdles Marini is wrong this person does pilfer Dicotyledones. fact10: This poikilotherm is not a haemorrhage. fact11: If that the fact that this Xylocaine is not angiocarpous and/or this is not a Aeolian hold is incorrect then the fact that this poikilotherm is not angiocarpous is right. fact12: If somebody does not shame Danau then he is not a Oceanic. fact13: The fact that if the fact that this poikilotherm pilfers Dicotyledones is wrong this poikilotherm is not a jabber and is not an analyticity is correct. fact14: That somebody is a acatalectic and a trinketry does not hold if it is not a Oceanic. fact15: This poikilotherm does not pilfer Dicotyledones.

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

This poikilotherm is not angiocarpous.

¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That dowager is not shedding and/or does not shame Danau if that dowager is not precedented. fact2: The fact that this Xylocaine does not pilfer Dicotyledones and girdles Marini does not hold if this grump is not a trinketry. fact3: That dowager is not precedented. fact4: That unraveller is not a jabber. fact5: This YB is not angiocarpous. fact6: the Dicotyledones does not pilfer poikilotherm. fact7: Somebody is angiocarpous if it is not a kind of a jabber and it is not an analyticity. fact8: This grump is not a trinketry if that that Humulin is a acatalectic and that is a kind of a trinketry does not hold. fact9: If that somebody does not pilfer Dicotyledones and girdles Marini is wrong this person does pilfer Dicotyledones. fact10: This poikilotherm is not a haemorrhage. fact11: If that the fact that this Xylocaine is not angiocarpous and/or this is not a Aeolian hold is incorrect then the fact that this poikilotherm is not angiocarpous is right. fact12: If somebody does not shame Danau then he is not a Oceanic. fact13: The fact that if the fact that this poikilotherm pilfers Dicotyledones is wrong this poikilotherm is not a jabber and is not an analyticity is correct. fact14: That somebody is a acatalectic and a trinketry does not hold if it is not a Oceanic. fact15: This poikilotherm does not pilfer Dicotyledones. ; $hypothesis$ = This poikilotherm is angiocarpous. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: If that this poikilotherm is not a kind of a jabber and it is not a kind of an analyticity hold it is angiocarpous.; fact15 & fact13 -> int2: This poikilotherm is not a jabber and she/he is not an analyticity.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This bioluminescence occurs.

{D}

fact1: This Slavicness leads to that this nomenklatura happens. fact2: This Slavicness occurs and/or that upendinging happens. fact3: This declining Myristicaceae is prevented by that the Post does not occurs but that isomericness happens. fact4: If this bioluminescence does not occurs that that upendinging occurs and this nomenklatura occurs is not correct. fact5: That non-univalentness is prevented by that this microcopying Halifax occurs. fact6: If this lodging Marxism happens then the toppingness occurs. fact7: If this declining Myristicaceae does not occurs then that miscreation and that sinning happens. fact8: That upendinging yields this nomenklatura. fact9: This bioluminescence does not happens if that that upendinging does not happens and this bioluminescence occurs does not hold. fact10: Both that upendinging and this nomenklatura happens if this tarsalness does not happens. fact11: That notthis tarsalness but that disembarkation occurs is brought about by that miscreation. fact12: That this tarsalness does not occurs yields that this bioluminescence does not occurs. fact13: That this bioluminescence does not occurs is prevented by this nomenklatura. fact14: That arborealness occurs and/or that ripening archidiaconate occurs.

fact1: {A} -> {C} fact2: ({A} v {B}) fact3: (¬{J} & {K}) -> ¬{I} fact4: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact5: {BH} -> {ID} fact6: {JE} -> {EK} fact7: ¬{I} -> ({G} & {H}) fact8: {B} -> {C} fact9: ¬(¬{B} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact10: ¬{E} -> ({B} & {C}) fact11: {G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) fact12: ¬{E} -> ¬{D} fact13: {C} -> {D} fact14: ({HI} v {CD})

That ripening archidiaconate occurs.

{CD}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Slavicness leads to that this nomenklatura happens. fact2: This Slavicness occurs and/or that upendinging happens. fact3: This declining Myristicaceae is prevented by that the Post does not occurs but that isomericness happens. fact4: If this bioluminescence does not occurs that that upendinging occurs and this nomenklatura occurs is not correct. fact5: That non-univalentness is prevented by that this microcopying Halifax occurs. fact6: If this lodging Marxism happens then the toppingness occurs. fact7: If this declining Myristicaceae does not occurs then that miscreation and that sinning happens. fact8: That upendinging yields this nomenklatura. fact9: This bioluminescence does not happens if that that upendinging does not happens and this bioluminescence occurs does not hold. fact10: Both that upendinging and this nomenklatura happens if this tarsalness does not happens. fact11: That notthis tarsalness but that disembarkation occurs is brought about by that miscreation. fact12: That this tarsalness does not occurs yields that this bioluminescence does not occurs. fact13: That this bioluminescence does not occurs is prevented by this nomenklatura. fact14: That arborealness occurs and/or that ripening archidiaconate occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This bioluminescence occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 & fact8 -> int1: This nomenklatura happens.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This calypso is a Unitarian but not sincere.

({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: Somebody is both a Unitarian and not sincere if it is salivary. fact2: This calypso is salivary if Cristian does monologuise liberalness. fact3: The fact that something is a Unitarian and is not sincere does not hold if it does not monologuise liberalness. fact4: this liberalness monologuises Cristian. fact5: Cristian monologuises liberalness.

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

The fact that this calypso is a Unitarian but that one is not sincere is wrong.

¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is both a Unitarian and not sincere if it is salivary. fact2: This calypso is salivary if Cristian does monologuise liberalness. fact3: The fact that something is a Unitarian and is not sincere does not hold if it does not monologuise liberalness. fact4: this liberalness monologuises Cristian. fact5: Cristian monologuises liberalness. ; $hypothesis$ = This calypso is a Unitarian but not sincere. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact5 -> int1: This calypso is salivary.; fact1 -> int2: If this calypso is salivary then this calypso is a Unitarian but it is not sincere.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That lamphouse extorts guaranty.

{B}{aa}

fact1: That lamphouse is a Nymphalidae. fact2: That lamphouse is a kind of a Baum. fact3: That lamphouse extorts guaranty if that flameflower is a Waite. fact4: If something is a kind of a Nymphalidae and is a Baum it does not extort guaranty. fact5: This megalith is not a Nymphalidae.

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

That lamphouse extorts guaranty.

{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lamphouse is a Nymphalidae. fact2: That lamphouse is a kind of a Baum. fact3: That lamphouse extorts guaranty if that flameflower is a Waite. fact4: If something is a kind of a Nymphalidae and is a Baum it does not extort guaranty. fact5: This megalith is not a Nymphalidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That lamphouse extorts guaranty. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: The fact that that lamphouse does not extort guaranty hold if it is a Nymphalidae and it is a kind of a Baum.; fact2 & fact1 -> int2: That that lamphouse is a kind of a Nymphalidae and is a kind of a Baum hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This neuralness happens.

{B}

fact1: That PPP does not happens if the fact that that plumbing Sakartvelo occurs but the Markovianness does not occurs does not hold. fact2: If this non-coastalness and/or that bastardization occurs then this coastalness does not occurs. fact3: If this victory does not occurs then notthe subduing perfected but the sulk occurs. fact4: That mysticness does not happens and this bantering piggishness does not occurs if that traveled happens. fact5: That this neuralness and this victory occurs is caused by that that question does not happens. fact6: That that plumbing Sakartvelo occurs but the Markovianness does not occurs is not true if that mysticness does not happens. fact7: If this bombination does not happens then both that traveled and the juicelessness occurs. fact8: That that question does not occurs and that nuptials does not occurs is caused by that that PPP does not occurs. fact9: That this non-dueness and the peeking Choriotis happens is triggered by this non-aphaniticness. fact10: That Hitlerianness happens. fact11: That notthe subduing perfected but the sulk occurs causes this non-neuralness. fact12: This bombination does not happens if this bombination does not occurs or this coastalness does not occurs or both.

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

This neuralness happens.

{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That PPP does not happens if the fact that that plumbing Sakartvelo occurs but the Markovianness does not occurs does not hold. fact2: If this non-coastalness and/or that bastardization occurs then this coastalness does not occurs. fact3: If this victory does not occurs then notthe subduing perfected but the sulk occurs. fact4: That mysticness does not happens and this bantering piggishness does not occurs if that traveled happens. fact5: That this neuralness and this victory occurs is caused by that that question does not happens. fact6: That that plumbing Sakartvelo occurs but the Markovianness does not occurs is not true if that mysticness does not happens. fact7: If this bombination does not happens then both that traveled and the juicelessness occurs. fact8: That that question does not occurs and that nuptials does not occurs is caused by that that PPP does not occurs. fact9: That this non-dueness and the peeking Choriotis happens is triggered by this non-aphaniticness. fact10: That Hitlerianness happens. fact11: That notthe subduing perfected but the sulk occurs causes this non-neuralness. fact12: This bombination does not happens if this bombination does not occurs or this coastalness does not occurs or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This neuralness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Notthat viscometry but that sloganeeringing happens.

(¬{C} & {D})

fact1: This pureness happens. fact2: If this palatalizing receptivity does not occurs that chomping pong and that decamping Lyrurus happens. fact3: That trephination happens. fact4: That this behaviouristicness occurs results in that that sloganeeringing does not happens and that winkling hao does not happens. fact5: If that the fact that notthat inosculating hudood but this headroom occurs is false is correct this palatalizing receptivity does not happens. fact6: The fact that this resale and that viscometry happens does not hold if that sloganeeringing does not occurs. fact7: That sloganeeringing occurs if that this behaviouristicness happens but that winkling hao does not occurs does not hold. fact8: This behaviouristicness happens and this pureness occurs if the fact that that Mooning does not occurs hold. fact9: That actinomycetalness happens. fact10: If the fact that that actinomycetalness does not occurs hold then that that stabilizing veracity but notthe pleasantry happens is not correct. fact11: If that actinomycetalness does not occurs the fact that notthat viscometry but that sloganeeringing happens does not hold. fact12: If that chomping pong happens then that conspiratorialness happens. fact13: The commuting happens. fact14: That actinomycetalness does not occurs if the fact that this resale happens and/or that winkling hao does not happens does not hold. fact15: This resale occurs. fact16: That that sloganeeringing occurs is triggered by that winkling hao. fact17: That this behaviouristicness occurs and that winkling hao happens is incorrect if that this pureness happens hold. fact18: That Mooning does not occurs if the fact that that conspiratorialness happens hold. fact19: If the fact that notthis behaviouristicness but that Mooning occurs is not right then this behaviouristicness occurs. fact20: The fact that this behaviouristicness and that winkling hao occurs is incorrect. fact21: If that this pureness does not happens hold then the fact that this non-behaviouristicness and that Mooning happens does not hold. fact22: If this pureness happens that the fact that this behaviouristicness occurs and that winkling hao does not happens is true does not hold.

fact1: {G} fact2: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact3: {BG} fact4: {F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact5: ¬(¬{N} & {M}) -> ¬{L} fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact7: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) -> {D} fact8: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact9: {A} fact10: ¬{A} -> ¬({FR} & ¬{JJ}) fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) fact12: {J} -> {I} fact13: {DA} fact14: ¬({B} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{A} fact15: {B} fact16: {E} -> {D} fact17: {G} -> ¬({F} & {E}) fact18: {I} -> ¬{H} fact19: ¬(¬{F} & {H}) -> {F} fact20: ¬({F} & {E}) fact21: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{F} & {H}) fact22: {G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{E})

That that stabilizing veracity happens but the pleasantry does not happens is wrong.

¬({FR} & ¬{JJ})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This pureness happens. fact2: If this palatalizing receptivity does not occurs that chomping pong and that decamping Lyrurus happens. fact3: That trephination happens. fact4: That this behaviouristicness occurs results in that that sloganeeringing does not happens and that winkling hao does not happens. fact5: If that the fact that notthat inosculating hudood but this headroom occurs is false is correct this palatalizing receptivity does not happens. fact6: The fact that this resale and that viscometry happens does not hold if that sloganeeringing does not occurs. fact7: That sloganeeringing occurs if that this behaviouristicness happens but that winkling hao does not occurs does not hold. fact8: This behaviouristicness happens and this pureness occurs if the fact that that Mooning does not occurs hold. fact9: That actinomycetalness happens. fact10: If the fact that that actinomycetalness does not occurs hold then that that stabilizing veracity but notthe pleasantry happens is not correct. fact11: If that actinomycetalness does not occurs the fact that notthat viscometry but that sloganeeringing happens does not hold. fact12: If that chomping pong happens then that conspiratorialness happens. fact13: The commuting happens. fact14: That actinomycetalness does not occurs if the fact that this resale happens and/or that winkling hao does not happens does not hold. fact15: This resale occurs. fact16: That that sloganeeringing occurs is triggered by that winkling hao. fact17: That this behaviouristicness occurs and that winkling hao happens is incorrect if that this pureness happens hold. fact18: That Mooning does not occurs if the fact that that conspiratorialness happens hold. fact19: If the fact that notthis behaviouristicness but that Mooning occurs is not right then this behaviouristicness occurs. fact20: The fact that this behaviouristicness and that winkling hao occurs is incorrect. fact21: If that this pureness does not happens hold then the fact that this non-behaviouristicness and that Mooning happens does not hold. fact22: If this pureness happens that the fact that this behaviouristicness occurs and that winkling hao does not happens is true does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = Notthat viscometry but that sloganeeringing happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Notthis necessary but this adamantineness happens.

(¬{D} & {C})

fact1: That this adamantineness occurs is caused by that this defogging laxness occurs. fact2: If this adamantineness happens this necessary does not occurs but this adamantineness occurs. fact3: That this defogging laxness does not occurs is prevented by this spiderliness.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this adamantineness occurs is caused by that this defogging laxness occurs. fact2: If this adamantineness happens this necessary does not occurs but this adamantineness occurs. fact3: That this defogging laxness does not occurs is prevented by this spiderliness. ; $hypothesis$ = Notthis necessary but this adamantineness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This appetizingness happens.

{B}

fact1: This fissionableness is prevented by that this dissension does not happens and that communicating happens. fact2: If that loveableness does not occurs then both this blossom and this unrealness happens. fact3: The fact that that loveableness occurs but the residing does not happens does not hold if this dissension happens. fact4: That boning D.A. does not occurs and that liberalization occurs. fact5: The agrobiologicness does not happens. fact6: This appetizingness and this Nigerian occurs if the tacking does not occurs. fact7: If that that loveableness happens but the residing does not occurs does not hold that loveableness does not occurs. fact8: The management does not occurs but the Lording occurs. fact9: Notthe processional but the expressing incongruousness occurs. fact10: If notthe amnesticness but this mural happens then this Nigerian does not happens. fact11: The concretizing is prevented by that the non-Voltaicness and this tabularness occurs. fact12: This homework does not occurs if the diverting Graz does not happens and that companying occurs. fact13: The sleepover is prevented by that notthe curing disconcertment but that leguminousness occurs. fact14: That barracking occurs and the tacking does not occurs if this blossom happens. fact15: That boning D.A. does not happens. fact16: If both that boning D.A. and that liberalization occurs this appetizingness does not happens. fact17: This deriding Pastinaca does not happens but this urceolateness occurs.

fact1: (¬{H} & {AL}) -> ¬{HB} fact2: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact3: {H} -> ¬({G} & ¬{I}) fact4: (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact5: ¬{DR} fact6: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact7: ¬({G} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} fact8: (¬{BR} & {IT}) fact9: (¬{BB} & {HE}) fact10: (¬{HT} & {HS}) -> ¬{A} fact11: (¬{BA} & {FM}) -> ¬{FI} fact12: (¬{FK} & {J}) -> ¬{HJ} fact13: (¬{HA} & {EM}) -> ¬{GM} fact14: {E} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) fact15: ¬{AA} fact16: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact17: (¬{FG} & {AF})

This appetizingness happens.

{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This fissionableness is prevented by that this dissension does not happens and that communicating happens. fact2: If that loveableness does not occurs then both this blossom and this unrealness happens. fact3: The fact that that loveableness occurs but the residing does not happens does not hold if this dissension happens. fact4: That boning D.A. does not occurs and that liberalization occurs. fact5: The agrobiologicness does not happens. fact6: This appetizingness and this Nigerian occurs if the tacking does not occurs. fact7: If that that loveableness happens but the residing does not occurs does not hold that loveableness does not occurs. fact8: The management does not occurs but the Lording occurs. fact9: Notthe processional but the expressing incongruousness occurs. fact10: If notthe amnesticness but this mural happens then this Nigerian does not happens. fact11: The concretizing is prevented by that the non-Voltaicness and this tabularness occurs. fact12: This homework does not occurs if the diverting Graz does not happens and that companying occurs. fact13: The sleepover is prevented by that notthe curing disconcertment but that leguminousness occurs. fact14: That barracking occurs and the tacking does not occurs if this blossom happens. fact15: That boning D.A. does not happens. fact16: If both that boning D.A. and that liberalization occurs this appetizingness does not happens. fact17: This deriding Pastinaca does not happens but this urceolateness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This appetizingness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That ferrocyanide does not overspread Bari.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This underperformer does not husband identifier if the fact that that illustration is a kind of a chained and he is unpotted is wrong. fact2: That ferrocyanide repines Shia. fact3: If this underperformer does not repine Shia but the person is prokaryotic then that ferrocyanide does not overspread Bari. fact4: If that this runt is a so and this one is consecrated is right this hypermastigote is not a so. fact5: That some man does overspread Bari hold if it does not repine Shia. fact6: If there exists someone such that that it is a fibrositis and it repines Shia hold this epinephrin does not repines Shia. fact7: Something that refines repines Shia. fact8: If that something is not a Theophrastus is correct then it is a fibrositis and prokaryotic. fact9: This runt is both a so and consecrated. fact10: That ferrocyanide is not a list. fact11: Something is not prejudicious and is not a Theophrastus if it is not a kind of a transactinide. fact12: Someone is not a fibrositis if that this person refines and is not a Theophrastus does not hold. fact13: If this underperformer does not husband identifier this underperformer does glow Eurydice and that thing is a titled. fact14: If this underperformer glows Eurydice then that ferrocyanide does refine. fact15: If something glows Eurydice that the thing refines and the thing is not a Theophrastus does not hold. fact16: The cineraria repines Shia. fact17: If somebody is not a list but the one is a megalohepatia then the one is not a transactinide. fact18: That that that illustration is a kind of a chained and is unpotted is false if the fact that this hypermastigote is not a kind of a so hold is true. fact19: If that illustration is not a fibrositis this underperformer does not repine Shia and is prokaryotic. fact20: That ferrocyanide is a kind of a megalohepatia.

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

That ferrocyanide does not overspread Bari.

¬{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This underperformer does not husband identifier if the fact that that illustration is a kind of a chained and he is unpotted is wrong. fact2: That ferrocyanide repines Shia. fact3: If this underperformer does not repine Shia but the person is prokaryotic then that ferrocyanide does not overspread Bari. fact4: If that this runt is a so and this one is consecrated is right this hypermastigote is not a so. fact5: That some man does overspread Bari hold if it does not repine Shia. fact6: If there exists someone such that that it is a fibrositis and it repines Shia hold this epinephrin does not repines Shia. fact7: Something that refines repines Shia. fact8: If that something is not a Theophrastus is correct then it is a fibrositis and prokaryotic. fact9: This runt is both a so and consecrated. fact10: That ferrocyanide is not a list. fact11: Something is not prejudicious and is not a Theophrastus if it is not a kind of a transactinide. fact12: Someone is not a fibrositis if that this person refines and is not a Theophrastus does not hold. fact13: If this underperformer does not husband identifier this underperformer does glow Eurydice and that thing is a titled. fact14: If this underperformer glows Eurydice then that ferrocyanide does refine. fact15: If something glows Eurydice that the thing refines and the thing is not a Theophrastus does not hold. fact16: The cineraria repines Shia. fact17: If somebody is not a list but the one is a megalohepatia then the one is not a transactinide. fact18: That that that illustration is a kind of a chained and is unpotted is false if the fact that this hypermastigote is not a kind of a so hold is true. fact19: If that illustration is not a fibrositis this underperformer does not repine Shia and is prokaryotic. fact20: That ferrocyanide is a kind of a megalohepatia. ; $hypothesis$ = That ferrocyanide does not overspread Bari. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That freightage does not occurs and that imitativeness does not happens.

(¬{C} & ¬{D})

fact1: If this handstand occurs that neutered happens. fact2: If this cushioning Zygophyllaceae and that privation occurs that freightage does not occurs. fact3: That that imitativeness occurs is prevented by that either this prophylaxis occurs or that raving happens or both. fact4: The synovialness and this messiahship occurs if this nipping does not occurs. fact5: If that reflecting happens this prophylaxis does not occurs and/or that raving does not happens. fact6: That both this remuneration and the uncrossing buoyancy happens prevents that this tooth occurs. fact7: This cushioning Zygophyllaceae occurs. fact8: Both that palisading 1770s and this blowing manat occurs. fact9: That this benevolence occurs triggers that this nipping does not occurs. fact10: That that reflecting does not happens is brought about by that the uncrossing buoyancy happens. fact11: If this tooth but notthis quarterfinal occurs then this handstand does not occurs. fact12: That this tooth happens but this quarterfinal does not occurs is brought about by that the biting does not happens. fact13: If this cushioning Zygophyllaceae does not occurs then the fact that that freightage does not happens and that imitativeness does not occurs is incorrect. fact14: The fact that the fact that that neutered occurs but that reflecting does not occurs is wrong hold if this handstand does not occurs. fact15: That that privation occurs is not incorrect. fact16: That raving does not occurs if the fact that that neutered happens and that reflecting does not happens is wrong. fact17: This prophylaxis prevents that that imitativeness occurs. fact18: That the biting does not happens and this gunning does not happens is triggered by this messiahship. fact19: That raving occurs. fact20: If that privation does not occurs then that preening and this cushioning Zygophyllaceae happens.

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

That preening happens.

{AP}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this handstand occurs that neutered happens. fact2: If this cushioning Zygophyllaceae and that privation occurs that freightage does not occurs. fact3: That that imitativeness occurs is prevented by that either this prophylaxis occurs or that raving happens or both. fact4: The synovialness and this messiahship occurs if this nipping does not occurs. fact5: If that reflecting happens this prophylaxis does not occurs and/or that raving does not happens. fact6: That both this remuneration and the uncrossing buoyancy happens prevents that this tooth occurs. fact7: This cushioning Zygophyllaceae occurs. fact8: Both that palisading 1770s and this blowing manat occurs. fact9: That this benevolence occurs triggers that this nipping does not occurs. fact10: That that reflecting does not happens is brought about by that the uncrossing buoyancy happens. fact11: If this tooth but notthis quarterfinal occurs then this handstand does not occurs. fact12: That this tooth happens but this quarterfinal does not occurs is brought about by that the biting does not happens. fact13: If this cushioning Zygophyllaceae does not occurs then the fact that that freightage does not happens and that imitativeness does not occurs is incorrect. fact14: The fact that the fact that that neutered occurs but that reflecting does not occurs is wrong hold if this handstand does not occurs. fact15: That that privation occurs is not incorrect. fact16: That raving does not occurs if the fact that that neutered happens and that reflecting does not happens is wrong. fact17: This prophylaxis prevents that that imitativeness occurs. fact18: That the biting does not happens and this gunning does not happens is triggered by this messiahship. fact19: That raving occurs. fact20: If that privation does not occurs then that preening and this cushioning Zygophyllaceae happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That freightage does not occurs and that imitativeness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact15 -> int1: Both this cushioning Zygophyllaceae and that privation happens.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That freightage does not occurs.; fact19 -> int3: This prophylaxis occurs and/or that raving occurs.; int3 & fact3 -> int4: That imitativeness does not happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This miscellany exploits shariah.

{B}{a}

fact1: This Christ sequesters Johannesburg. fact2: the fact that the Johannesburg sequesters miscellany is not wrong. fact3: The fact that this miscellany sequesters Johannesburg is not wrong. fact4: If someone is not colorful then it exploits shariah and it does sequester Johannesburg. fact5: If the fact that something is not a workmanship but non-Icelandic does not hold the fact that it is not colorful is not false. fact6: A non-colorful person that sequesters Johannesburg does not exploit shariah. fact7: A Icelandic man is non-colorful man that sequesters Johannesburg.

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

This miscellany does not exploit shariah.

¬{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Christ sequesters Johannesburg. fact2: the fact that the Johannesburg sequesters miscellany is not wrong. fact3: The fact that this miscellany sequesters Johannesburg is not wrong. fact4: If someone is not colorful then it exploits shariah and it does sequester Johannesburg. fact5: If the fact that something is not a workmanship but non-Icelandic does not hold the fact that it is not colorful is not false. fact6: A non-colorful person that sequesters Johannesburg does not exploit shariah. fact7: A Icelandic man is non-colorful man that sequesters Johannesburg. ; $hypothesis$ = This miscellany exploits shariah. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that laryngopharynx is not incorrigible but a Lutrinae is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

fact1: That thrombolysis is conjunctival if this person blinds. fact2: That that laryngopharynx is not incorrigible is correct if that it is not a Marsupialia and is a kind of a Kamasutra is not true. fact3: If something is refined then that is not incorrigible and that encroaches. fact4: That thrombolysis does not uncouple Bootes and is not tricentennial if it is conjunctival. fact5: If that forefront does not encroach the fact that that laryngopharynx is not incorrigible but it is a Lutrinae is incorrect. fact6: Some man is not unrefined if that that one is unrefined and that one is not a kind of a Marsupialia does not hold. fact7: If something does not uncouple Bootes and is not tricentennial then it is a kind of a Kamasutra. fact8: If something is a Kamasutra then the fact that it is unrefined and it is not a Marsupialia does not hold.

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

That laryngopharynx is a kind of non-incorrigible a Lutrinae.

(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That thrombolysis is conjunctival if this person blinds. fact2: That that laryngopharynx is not incorrigible is correct if that it is not a Marsupialia and is a kind of a Kamasutra is not true. fact3: If something is refined then that is not incorrigible and that encroaches. fact4: That thrombolysis does not uncouple Bootes and is not tricentennial if it is conjunctival. fact5: If that forefront does not encroach the fact that that laryngopharynx is not incorrigible but it is a Lutrinae is incorrect. fact6: Some man is not unrefined if that that one is unrefined and that one is not a kind of a Marsupialia does not hold. fact7: If something does not uncouple Bootes and is not tricentennial then it is a kind of a Kamasutra. fact8: If something is a Kamasutra then the fact that it is unrefined and it is not a Marsupialia does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that laryngopharynx is not incorrigible but a Lutrinae is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that wick is a conformist and/or it does not reorganize Midrash is false.

¬({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: That seconder is not bacteriologic. fact2: Someone is a conformist or does not reorganize Midrash or both if it is bacteriologic. fact3: If that seconder is not bacteriologic that that wick is a conformist or this thing does not reorganize Midrash or both does not hold. fact4: That the fact that that seconder either is bacteriologic or is not a conformist or both is false is true if that wick does not reorganize Midrash. fact5: That wick reorganizes Midrash. fact6: If that seconder is not bacteriologic that wick reorganizes Midrash.

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

That wick is a conformist or the thing does not reorganize Midrash or both.

({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That seconder is not bacteriologic. fact2: Someone is a conformist or does not reorganize Midrash or both if it is bacteriologic. fact3: If that seconder is not bacteriologic that that wick is a conformist or this thing does not reorganize Midrash or both does not hold. fact4: That the fact that that seconder either is bacteriologic or is not a conformist or both is false is true if that wick does not reorganize Midrash. fact5: That wick reorganizes Midrash. fact6: If that seconder is not bacteriologic that wick reorganizes Midrash. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that wick is a conformist and/or it does not reorganize Midrash is false. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That propagandist is not a commodiousness.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: If this Redeemer is not hymenal then that propagandist is a commodiousness that is a kind of a Welwitschiaceae. fact2: That propagandist does powder Microcentrum and is not a democracy. fact3: This guncotton is a Welwitschiaceae. fact4: The oxtail is a commodiousness but it is not incestuous. fact5: The Macon is a commodiousness. fact6: If something is a down it is not hymenal. fact7: That propagandist furnishes Alexandrine but that is not a Kline. fact8: The fact that the discriminator is a kind of a commodiousness is true. fact9: The roadway is a kind of a commodiousness. fact10: That propagandist assumes and is not a used. fact11: That propagandist does not socialise inflexibleness.

fact1: ¬{C}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact2: ({BE}{a} & ¬{CO}{a}) fact3: {A}{ha} fact4: ({B}{d} & ¬{DD}{d}) fact5: {B}{ab} fact6: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x fact7: ({CF}{a} & ¬{BK}{a}) fact8: {B}{fk} fact9: {B}{ch} fact10: ({IK}{a} & ¬{IF}{a}) fact11: ¬{DR}{a}

That propagandist is a commodiousness.

{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Redeemer is not hymenal then that propagandist is a commodiousness that is a kind of a Welwitschiaceae. fact2: That propagandist does powder Microcentrum and is not a democracy. fact3: This guncotton is a Welwitschiaceae. fact4: The oxtail is a commodiousness but it is not incestuous. fact5: The Macon is a commodiousness. fact6: If something is a down it is not hymenal. fact7: That propagandist furnishes Alexandrine but that is not a Kline. fact8: The fact that the discriminator is a kind of a commodiousness is true. fact9: The roadway is a kind of a commodiousness. fact10: That propagandist assumes and is not a used. fact11: That propagandist does not socialise inflexibleness. ; $hypothesis$ = That propagandist is not a commodiousness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that the fact that that Mulla inebriates acquisitiveness and she is a antonym hold is false.

¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: That that Mulla is a kind of a brewing and is not a antonym is false. fact2: That Mulla is a kind of urethral thing that inebriates acquisitiveness. fact3: If the fact that that Mulla is a brewing but it is not a antonym is wrong then that Mulla is a kind of a antonym. fact4: If something is not urethral then that it inebriates acquisitiveness and it is a kind of a antonym is wrong.

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

The fact that the fact that that Mulla inebriates acquisitiveness and she is a antonym hold is false.

¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that Mulla is a kind of a brewing and is not a antonym is false. fact2: That Mulla is a kind of urethral thing that inebriates acquisitiveness. fact3: If the fact that that Mulla is a brewing but it is not a antonym is wrong then that Mulla is a kind of a antonym. fact4: If something is not urethral then that it inebriates acquisitiveness and it is a kind of a antonym is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that that Mulla inebriates acquisitiveness and she is a antonym hold is false. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That Mulla does inebriate acquisitiveness.; fact1 & fact3 -> int2: That Mulla is a antonym.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That croton cusseds.

{B}{b}

fact1: If this taxi does sandbag asper then that croton cusseds. fact2: This taxi cusseds. fact3: This taxi is a Saturniidae. fact4: The fact that that croton sandbags asper is right. fact5: This taxi is not a Sclerotiniaceae if this cobblers is a Sclerotiniaceae but it is not a Jeffersonian. fact6: That Arabian is a Nergal and it is eventful. fact7: If a Nergal is not terrestrial then it is not a Scolopacidae. fact8: that asper sandbags taxi. fact9: That croton sandbags asper if this taxi cusseds. fact10: If that benefactress is not a Scolopacidae then this cobblers is both a Sclerotiniaceae and not a Jeffersonian. fact11: If that something is a doubleton is right that thing Mars. fact12: Some person does not cussed and does not sandbag asper if he/she does Mar. fact13: That croton is a longevity and he is a kind of a doubleton if this taxi is not a Sclerotiniaceae. fact14: This taxi does cussed if that that croton sandbags asper is correct. fact15: If that croton cusseds this taxi is not non-forehand.

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

That croton does not cussed.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this taxi does sandbag asper then that croton cusseds. fact2: This taxi cusseds. fact3: This taxi is a Saturniidae. fact4: The fact that that croton sandbags asper is right. fact5: This taxi is not a Sclerotiniaceae if this cobblers is a Sclerotiniaceae but it is not a Jeffersonian. fact6: That Arabian is a Nergal and it is eventful. fact7: If a Nergal is not terrestrial then it is not a Scolopacidae. fact8: that asper sandbags taxi. fact9: That croton sandbags asper if this taxi cusseds. fact10: If that benefactress is not a Scolopacidae then this cobblers is both a Sclerotiniaceae and not a Jeffersonian. fact11: If that something is a doubleton is right that thing Mars. fact12: Some person does not cussed and does not sandbag asper if he/she does Mar. fact13: That croton is a longevity and he is a kind of a doubleton if this taxi is not a Sclerotiniaceae. fact14: This taxi does cussed if that that croton sandbags asper is correct. fact15: If that croton cusseds this taxi is not non-forehand. ; $hypothesis$ = That croton cusseds. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Either that enthusiast does not solve Acocanthera or this one is not a lampoon or both.

(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That enthusiast solves Acocanthera if he is a Suisse. fact2: If that some man is not a conjecture and not non-postglacial does not hold then that it is not non-postglacial is right. fact3: That enthusiast solves Acocanthera. fact4: The fact that something is not a kind of a Suisse or is not unsurmountable or both does not hold if the fact that that is a VLF is correct. fact5: That that enthusiast either is not a Hedjaz or does not solve Acocanthera or both does not hold if that enthusiast gratifies smallpox. fact6: That enthusiast is a Suisse. fact7: Some person is both unclean and managerial if he/she is non-postglacial. fact8: If something is unclean then it is a VLF. fact9: If that enthusiast is a possessive the fact that that Cathaya is not a conjecture and is postglacial is not true. fact10: That either that enthusiast does not solve Acocanthera or she/he is not a kind of a lampoon or both is false if she/he is a Suisse. fact11: That that enthusiast is not orthopedic and/or it does not retrofit Acipenseridae is wrong if it solves Acocanthera.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {AA}{a} fact2: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x fact3: {AA}{a} fact4: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x v ¬{FM}x) fact5: {FP}{a} -> ¬(¬{GO}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) fact6: {A}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) fact8: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact9: {F}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{ac} & {E}{ac}) fact10: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact11: {AA}{a} -> ¬(¬{EO}{a} v ¬{S}{a})

That that Cathaya is not a Suisse or that thing is not unsurmountable or both is incorrect.

¬(¬{A}{ac} v ¬{FM}{ac})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That enthusiast solves Acocanthera if he is a Suisse. fact2: If that some man is not a conjecture and not non-postglacial does not hold then that it is not non-postglacial is right. fact3: That enthusiast solves Acocanthera. fact4: The fact that something is not a kind of a Suisse or is not unsurmountable or both does not hold if the fact that that is a VLF is correct. fact5: That that enthusiast either is not a Hedjaz or does not solve Acocanthera or both does not hold if that enthusiast gratifies smallpox. fact6: That enthusiast is a Suisse. fact7: Some person is both unclean and managerial if he/she is non-postglacial. fact8: If something is unclean then it is a VLF. fact9: If that enthusiast is a possessive the fact that that Cathaya is not a conjecture and is postglacial is not true. fact10: That either that enthusiast does not solve Acocanthera or she/he is not a kind of a lampoon or both is false if she/he is a Suisse. fact11: That that enthusiast is not orthopedic and/or it does not retrofit Acipenseridae is wrong if it solves Acocanthera. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that enthusiast does not solve Acocanthera or this one is not a lampoon or both. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That mesenchyme does not price chunking.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: Some person parts Corse if that it is not isomorphous and does not transmute Mazdaism is false. fact2: If something is isomorphous then it parts Corse. fact3: Something prices chunking if it does part Corse. fact4: The phospholipid is calcaneal. fact5: That that mesenchyme is not isomorphous and does not transmute Mazdaism is false if the phospholipid is calcaneal.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Some person parts Corse if that it is not isomorphous and does not transmute Mazdaism is false. fact2: If something is isomorphous then it parts Corse. fact3: Something prices chunking if it does part Corse. fact4: The phospholipid is calcaneal. fact5: That that mesenchyme is not isomorphous and does not transmute Mazdaism is false if the phospholipid is calcaneal. ; $hypothesis$ = That mesenchyme does not price chunking. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact4 -> int1: That that mesenchyme is non-isomorphous and it does not transmute Mazdaism does not hold.; fact1 -> int2: That mesenchyme parts Corse if that it is not isomorphous and it does not transmute Mazdaism is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That mesenchyme parts Corse.; fact3 -> int4: That mesenchyme prices chunking if that mesenchyme does part Corse.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This bakeshop invalids logbook and is not a kind of a pct.

({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

fact1: If that hillbilly is not a cholestasis then this bakeshop is a cholestasis but not a pct. fact2: If the fact that some man does not euphemize but this one is a kind of a shivering does not hold then this one is not monotheistic. fact3: The mizzle is emptying. fact4: If that aspirant is not a Docetism that that hillbilly is not emptying but it is a cholestasis does not hold. fact5: Some man that is a physicality is not a kind of a pouched. fact6: Something does not invalid logbook if that this is not emptying and this is a kind of a cholestasis is incorrect. fact7: Someone that jogs Cecropiaceae is legal. fact8: That aspirant invalids logbook. fact9: If that something is not a NSW and is alular does not hold that the thing is not a splicing is correct. fact10: The fact that somebody invalids logbook and is not a pct does not hold if it is a kind of a Docetism. fact11: That that hillbilly is both emptying and a cholestasis is incorrect if that aspirant is not a Docetism. fact12: If that that hillbilly does not invalid logbook is right this bakeshop invalid logbook and is not a pct. fact13: This bakeshop is not emptying if that he/she is not a pct and invalids logbook does not hold. fact14: A legal thing is a Docetism. fact15: The fact that that hillbilly is a cholestasis and it is a Docetism is wrong. fact16: That aspirant is not a Docetism.

fact1: ¬{AB}{b} -> ({AB}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{GR}x & {CB}x) -> ¬{IE}x fact3: {AA}{m} fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact5: (x): {HB}x -> ¬{IR}x fact6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): {E}x -> {C}x fact8: {B}{a} fact9: (x): ¬(¬{DN}x & {FU}x) -> ¬{CD}x fact10: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) fact11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact12: ¬{B}{b} -> ({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact13: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {B}{c}) -> ¬{AA}{c} fact14: (x): {C}x -> {A}x fact15: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact16: ¬{A}{a}

That this bakeshop invalids logbook and is not a kind of a pct is wrong.

¬({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that hillbilly is not a cholestasis then this bakeshop is a cholestasis but not a pct. fact2: If the fact that some man does not euphemize but this one is a kind of a shivering does not hold then this one is not monotheistic. fact3: The mizzle is emptying. fact4: If that aspirant is not a Docetism that that hillbilly is not emptying but it is a cholestasis does not hold. fact5: Some man that is a physicality is not a kind of a pouched. fact6: Something does not invalid logbook if that this is not emptying and this is a kind of a cholestasis is incorrect. fact7: Someone that jogs Cecropiaceae is legal. fact8: That aspirant invalids logbook. fact9: If that something is not a NSW and is alular does not hold that the thing is not a splicing is correct. fact10: The fact that somebody invalids logbook and is not a pct does not hold if it is a kind of a Docetism. fact11: That that hillbilly is both emptying and a cholestasis is incorrect if that aspirant is not a Docetism. fact12: If that that hillbilly does not invalid logbook is right this bakeshop invalid logbook and is not a pct. fact13: This bakeshop is not emptying if that he/she is not a pct and invalids logbook does not hold. fact14: A legal thing is a Docetism. fact15: The fact that that hillbilly is a cholestasis and it is a Docetism is wrong. fact16: That aspirant is not a Docetism. ; $hypothesis$ = This bakeshop invalids logbook and is not a kind of a pct. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact16 -> int1: The fact that that hillbilly is non-emptying but it is a cholestasis is not correct.; fact6 -> int2: That hillbilly does not invalid logbook if the fact that it is a kind of non-emptying man that is a cholestasis is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That hillbilly does not invalid logbook.; int3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that the fact that both that non-communalness and this obscenity occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: The fact that if that masking nonce occurs this slicing pacific occurs and this negativing Spirochaetaceae does not occurs hold. fact2: This maxillariness does not occurs if that communalness happens. fact3: That notthe seeking Kachin but that fogbank happens is wrong. fact4: The fact that that communalness and this obscenity occurs is not correct. fact5: That that this negativing Spirochaetaceae does not happens and that thrusting Carpentaria does not happens hold is not correct. fact6: This maxillariness happens if the fact that this negativing Spirochaetaceae does not occurs and that thrusting Carpentaria does not occurs is incorrect. fact7: The fact that notthis negativing Spirochaetaceae but that thrusting Carpentaria occurs is wrong. fact8: The fact that that communalness does not happens and this obscenity happens is wrong if that thrusting Carpentaria does not occurs. fact9: That thrusting Carpentaria yields this maxillariness. fact10: That the marking does not occurs and that cobblestoning occurs does not hold. fact11: If that thrusting Carpentaria occurs the fact that this maxillariness does not happens and that unbending does not happens is false. fact12: If that this maxillariness does not happens and that unbending does not happens is wrong that unbending happens. fact13: If the fact that that non-communalness and this obscenity occurs is not true then this maxillariness does not happens.

fact1: {E} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) fact2: {AA} -> ¬{B} fact3: ¬(¬{GU} & {AO}) fact4: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact5: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) fact6: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) -> {B} fact7: ¬(¬{C} & {A}) fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact9: {A} -> {B} fact10: ¬(¬{CQ} & {DG}) fact11: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{HQ}) fact12: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{HQ}) -> {HQ} fact13: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B}

That that unbending occurs is correct.

{HQ}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that if that masking nonce occurs this slicing pacific occurs and this negativing Spirochaetaceae does not occurs hold. fact2: This maxillariness does not occurs if that communalness happens. fact3: That notthe seeking Kachin but that fogbank happens is wrong. fact4: The fact that that communalness and this obscenity occurs is not correct. fact5: That that this negativing Spirochaetaceae does not happens and that thrusting Carpentaria does not happens hold is not correct. fact6: This maxillariness happens if the fact that this negativing Spirochaetaceae does not occurs and that thrusting Carpentaria does not occurs is incorrect. fact7: The fact that notthis negativing Spirochaetaceae but that thrusting Carpentaria occurs is wrong. fact8: The fact that that communalness does not happens and this obscenity happens is wrong if that thrusting Carpentaria does not occurs. fact9: That thrusting Carpentaria yields this maxillariness. fact10: That the marking does not occurs and that cobblestoning occurs does not hold. fact11: If that thrusting Carpentaria occurs the fact that this maxillariness does not happens and that unbending does not happens is false. fact12: If that this maxillariness does not happens and that unbending does not happens is wrong that unbending happens. fact13: If the fact that that non-communalness and this obscenity occurs is not true then this maxillariness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that the fact that both that non-communalness and this obscenity occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that both that non-communalness and this obscenity occurs does not hold.; fact13 & assump1 -> int1: This maxillariness does not happens.; fact5 & fact6 -> int2: This maxillariness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That moulting Gibran happens.

{C}

fact1: That this apposition happens and/or that diversion prevents that moulting Gibran. fact2: If that embezzlement does not occurs the fact that that diversion and this hanging happens is false. fact3: That moulting Gibran does not occurs if this apposition happens. fact4: That diversion occurs. fact5: That embezzlement happens or that moulting Gibran does not happens or both if this hanging does not occurs. fact6: This Chinook happens. fact7: The schoolwork happens and/or the sericulture happens. fact8: The boronicness occurs or the indorsement happens or both. fact9: The fact that that canulation does not occurs is right. fact10: That the pretorialness does not occurs is not incorrect. fact11: That either this contemporizing nubbiness or the apianness or both happens is true. fact12: That that embezzlement does not occurs is caused by that that atonement does not happens and this writing prostatitis does not happens. fact13: That diversion does not happens if the fact that the fact that that diversion and this hanging occurs is false is right. fact14: The tricentennialness happens.

fact1: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact2: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {E}) fact3: {A} -> ¬{C} fact4: {B} fact5: ¬{E} -> ({D} v ¬{C}) fact6: {IG} fact7: ({EJ} v {S}) fact8: ({CQ} v {CN}) fact9: ¬{GO} fact10: ¬{AB} fact11: ({IT} v {JC}) fact12: (¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{D} fact13: ¬({B} & {E}) -> ¬{B} fact14: {ID}

That moulting Gibran happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this apposition happens and/or that diversion prevents that moulting Gibran. fact2: If that embezzlement does not occurs the fact that that diversion and this hanging happens is false. fact3: That moulting Gibran does not occurs if this apposition happens. fact4: That diversion occurs. fact5: That embezzlement happens or that moulting Gibran does not happens or both if this hanging does not occurs. fact6: This Chinook happens. fact7: The schoolwork happens and/or the sericulture happens. fact8: The boronicness occurs or the indorsement happens or both. fact9: The fact that that canulation does not occurs is right. fact10: That the pretorialness does not occurs is not incorrect. fact11: That either this contemporizing nubbiness or the apianness or both happens is true. fact12: That that embezzlement does not occurs is caused by that that atonement does not happens and this writing prostatitis does not happens. fact13: That diversion does not happens if the fact that the fact that that diversion and this hanging occurs is false is right. fact14: The tricentennialness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That moulting Gibran happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This apposition occurs and/or that diversion happens.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This wrestler is not civil.

{A}{b}

fact1: If someone is a kind of a 22 that person is inclusive. fact2: That reel is not glial but this is a kind of a chromesthesia. fact3: Some person that is not provocative is not protestant and/or cloys. fact4: If something that is not a Gleichenia does not cloy then it is uncivil. fact5: This prod is uncivil if that reel is uncivil. fact6: That reel is non-glial. fact7: There exists something such that the fact that it cloys and is protestant does not hold. fact8: Someone is not uncivil if it is not a Gleichenia. fact9: There exists nothing that is not provocative but a Gleichenia. fact10: That reel is uncivil. fact11: Something is not provocative if the fact that it is a kind of a 22 that is competent is false. fact12: This wrestler is not a chromesthesia. fact13: If that reel is glial and this thing is a chromesthesia then this wrestler is a Gleichenia. fact14: If this wrestler is a chromesthesia and is glial then that reel is a Gleichenia. fact15: Some man that is protestant does not cloy and is a Gleichenia. fact16: That reel is not glial and is a Gleichenia. fact17: Something is a Gleichenia if it is glial. fact18: That reel is a kind of a passion. fact19: If some man is not protestant and/or does cloy it is not a Gleichenia. fact20: That reel is not a Neolithic but it is uncivil. fact21: This wrestler is a Gleichenia if that reel is not glial and is a chromesthesia. fact22: The Protropin is uncivil if it bedazzles Cajanus.

fact1: (x): {G}x -> {AR}x fact2: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x v {C}x) fact4: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x fact5: {A}{a} -> {A}{o} fact6: ¬{AA}{a} fact7: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {D}x) fact8: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x fact9: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {B}x) fact10: {A}{a} fact11: (x): ¬({G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{E}x fact12: ¬{AB}{b} fact13: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact14: ({AB}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> {B}{a} fact15: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & {B}x) fact16: (¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) fact17: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x fact18: {FI}{a} fact19: (x): (¬{D}x v {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact20: (¬{FP}{a} & {A}{a}) fact21: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact22: {L}{en} -> {A}{en}

This wrestler is not uncivil.

¬{A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If someone is a kind of a 22 that person is inclusive. fact2: That reel is not glial but this is a kind of a chromesthesia. fact3: Some person that is not provocative is not protestant and/or cloys. fact4: If something that is not a Gleichenia does not cloy then it is uncivil. fact5: This prod is uncivil if that reel is uncivil. fact6: That reel is non-glial. fact7: There exists something such that the fact that it cloys and is protestant does not hold. fact8: Someone is not uncivil if it is not a Gleichenia. fact9: There exists nothing that is not provocative but a Gleichenia. fact10: That reel is uncivil. fact11: Something is not provocative if the fact that it is a kind of a 22 that is competent is false. fact12: This wrestler is not a chromesthesia. fact13: If that reel is glial and this thing is a chromesthesia then this wrestler is a Gleichenia. fact14: If this wrestler is a chromesthesia and is glial then that reel is a Gleichenia. fact15: Some man that is protestant does not cloy and is a Gleichenia. fact16: That reel is not glial and is a Gleichenia. fact17: Something is a Gleichenia if it is glial. fact18: That reel is a kind of a passion. fact19: If some man is not protestant and/or does cloy it is not a Gleichenia. fact20: That reel is not a Neolithic but it is uncivil. fact21: This wrestler is a Gleichenia if that reel is not glial and is a chromesthesia. fact22: The Protropin is uncivil if it bedazzles Cajanus. ; $hypothesis$ = This wrestler is not civil. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that waggonwright books contiguity but it is not a Yanan does not hold.

¬({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: That waggonwright books contiguity if that piperazine does cultivate. fact2: That that waggonwright is not a Yanan hold if the fact that she does not hotfoot Nyssa and/or she is Amerindic does not hold. fact3: If that Sculptor is a kind of non-carboniferous one that is not a kind of a Hanover then that Sculptor is not a Courbet. fact4: Somebody is both not carboniferous and not a Hanover if this one does not blindside Tubercularia. fact5: That this bigarade is a Iliamna and does not flatter Aeneas is incorrect. fact6: If that Sculptor is not a Courbet then the fact that the thing does not hotfoot Nyssa and is a Yanan is not true. fact7: The fact that that waggonwright does not hotfoot Nyssa and/or it is Amerindic is wrong. fact8: That piperazine does cultivate if that this bigarade is a kind of a Iliamna that does not flatter Aeneas does not hold. fact9: Everything does not blindside Tubercularia.

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

That Sculptor is Amerindic.

{D}{jg}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That waggonwright books contiguity if that piperazine does cultivate. fact2: That that waggonwright is not a Yanan hold if the fact that she does not hotfoot Nyssa and/or she is Amerindic does not hold. fact3: If that Sculptor is a kind of non-carboniferous one that is not a kind of a Hanover then that Sculptor is not a Courbet. fact4: Somebody is both not carboniferous and not a Hanover if this one does not blindside Tubercularia. fact5: That this bigarade is a Iliamna and does not flatter Aeneas is incorrect. fact6: If that Sculptor is not a Courbet then the fact that the thing does not hotfoot Nyssa and is a Yanan is not true. fact7: The fact that that waggonwright does not hotfoot Nyssa and/or it is Amerindic is wrong. fact8: That piperazine does cultivate if that this bigarade is a kind of a Iliamna that does not flatter Aeneas does not hold. fact9: Everything does not blindside Tubercularia. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that waggonwright books contiguity but it is not a Yanan does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact5 -> int1: That piperazine cultivates.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That waggonwright books contiguity.; fact7 & fact2 -> int3: That that waggonwright is not a Yanan is right.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that placentalness and this sericulturalness occurs hold.

({B} & {A})

fact1: If this derailing does not occurs that recital occurs and that placentalness does not happens. fact2: The investiture happens. fact3: That placentalness occurs if the piloting happens but that persuasion does not occurs. fact4: The obtunding FinCEN happens if notthe stay but that hexangularness occurs. fact5: If this Swedish does not happens that that placentalness and this sericulturalness happens is incorrect. fact6: This sericulturalness happens. fact7: If notthe piloting but that persuasion happens then that placentalness happens. fact8: That this pick happens and this sericulturalness happens hold if that placentalness does not occurs. fact9: That this Swedish happens is prevented by that that classificatoriness does not occurs and that recital does not occurs. fact10: The sectioning thanatology does not occurs. fact11: If the piloting does not happens and that persuasion does not happens that placentalness occurs. fact12: The sleeping happens. fact13: That naturalizing occurs. fact14: Either that that classificatoriness happens or this Swedish or both is triggered by that insaneness. fact15: The piloting does not occurs and that persuasion does not happens. fact16: If the goness does not occurs and the Crowing does not occurs then that following occurs.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{B}) fact2: {BA} fact3: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact4: (¬{AJ} & {AQ}) -> {FC} fact5: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {A}) fact6: {A} fact7: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact8: ¬{B} -> ({BD} & {A}) fact9: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact10: ¬{AK} fact11: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact12: {DR} fact13: {FU} fact14: ¬{G} -> ({D} v {C}) fact15: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact16: (¬{EP} & ¬{CR}) -> {ED}

That that placentalness and this sericulturalness happens is wrong.

¬({B} & {A})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this derailing does not occurs that recital occurs and that placentalness does not happens. fact2: The investiture happens. fact3: That placentalness occurs if the piloting happens but that persuasion does not occurs. fact4: The obtunding FinCEN happens if notthe stay but that hexangularness occurs. fact5: If this Swedish does not happens that that placentalness and this sericulturalness happens is incorrect. fact6: This sericulturalness happens. fact7: If notthe piloting but that persuasion happens then that placentalness happens. fact8: That this pick happens and this sericulturalness happens hold if that placentalness does not occurs. fact9: That this Swedish happens is prevented by that that classificatoriness does not occurs and that recital does not occurs. fact10: The sectioning thanatology does not occurs. fact11: If the piloting does not happens and that persuasion does not happens that placentalness occurs. fact12: The sleeping happens. fact13: That naturalizing occurs. fact14: Either that that classificatoriness happens or this Swedish or both is triggered by that insaneness. fact15: The piloting does not occurs and that persuasion does not happens. fact16: If the goness does not occurs and the Crowing does not occurs then that following occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that placentalness and this sericulturalness occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact15 -> int1: That placentalness happens.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that every man is not a ultimacy and does not spoof Mariposan is incorrect.

¬((x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: Something does memorialise Toscana if it is not a blackwater or it profiles whorled or both. fact2: Something is a Bradbury if it does cornice Heinlein. fact3: Everything does not inscribe Equetus and that does not defuse returning. fact4: Everything is not a ultimacy and it does not spoof Mariposan. fact5: Everyone is not a Christchurch and it is not a OWLT. fact6: If something is a Bradbury it either is not a kind of a blackwater or profiles whorled or both. fact7: Everyone does not spoof Mariposan. fact8: Everyone does not gnarl Anvers and he/she is not thinkable. fact9: Every person cornices Heinlein. fact10: Everything does not betide and does not engross. fact11: Everybody is not a kind of a Jalalabad and it does not unclad diploidy. fact12: Everything is not Tyrolese and is not a Herakles. fact13: Everything is not a provincialism and does not unclad diploidy. fact14: Everything is a kind of non-anginose thing that is not a Gerrididae. fact15: Every man is not a vertebrate and the person is not a surrounded. fact16: Every person is not a nationality and not catarrhal. fact17: Everybody is not a Gloucester and it does not reckon. fact18: Everybody is not chyliferous and is not cantonal.

fact1: (x): (¬{C}x v {B}x) -> {A}x fact2: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact3: (x): (¬{HR}x & ¬{ID}x) fact4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact5: (x): (¬{CF}x & ¬{HM}x) fact6: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x v {B}x) fact7: (x): ¬{AB}x fact8: (x): (¬{IN}x & ¬{FJ}x) fact9: (x): {E}x fact10: (x): (¬{FT}x & ¬{CQ}x) fact11: (x): (¬{IS}x & ¬{HJ}x) fact12: (x): (¬{DM}x & ¬{HS}x) fact13: (x): (¬{CJ}x & ¬{HJ}x) fact14: (x): (¬{BE}x & ¬{EU}x) fact15: (x): (¬{HG}x & ¬{IJ}x) fact16: (x): (¬{DQ}x & ¬{AG}x) fact17: (x): (¬{BA}x & ¬{GE}x) fact18: (x): (¬{DF}x & ¬{CK}x)

Everybody is non-lyric one that is not a kind of a solid.

(x): (¬{BN}x & ¬{IQ}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something does memorialise Toscana if it is not a blackwater or it profiles whorled or both. fact2: Something is a Bradbury if it does cornice Heinlein. fact3: Everything does not inscribe Equetus and that does not defuse returning. fact4: Everything is not a ultimacy and it does not spoof Mariposan. fact5: Everyone is not a Christchurch and it is not a OWLT. fact6: If something is a Bradbury it either is not a kind of a blackwater or profiles whorled or both. fact7: Everyone does not spoof Mariposan. fact8: Everyone does not gnarl Anvers and he/she is not thinkable. fact9: Every person cornices Heinlein. fact10: Everything does not betide and does not engross. fact11: Everybody is not a kind of a Jalalabad and it does not unclad diploidy. fact12: Everything is not Tyrolese and is not a Herakles. fact13: Everything is not a provincialism and does not unclad diploidy. fact14: Everything is a kind of non-anginose thing that is not a Gerrididae. fact15: Every man is not a vertebrate and the person is not a surrounded. fact16: Every person is not a nationality and not catarrhal. fact17: Everybody is not a Gloucester and it does not reckon. fact18: Everybody is not chyliferous and is not cantonal. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that every man is not a ultimacy and does not spoof Mariposan is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this cardia did notder phantom and the one does not implant is incorrect.

¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: That saltshaker is a kind of an overshot. fact2: That saltshaker is both not butyraceous and an overshot. fact3: If that saltshaker is not butyraceous then this cardia did notder phantom and does not implant. fact4: If that saltshaker is not butyraceous this cardia does not implant.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That saltshaker is a kind of an overshot. fact2: That saltshaker is both not butyraceous and an overshot. fact3: If that saltshaker is not butyraceous then this cardia did notder phantom and does not implant. fact4: If that saltshaker is not butyraceous this cardia does not implant. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this cardia did notder phantom and the one does not implant is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That saltshaker is not butyraceous.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This unpretendingness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: That this wrangling occurs and this resettlement does not happens is triggered by that that assuming happens. fact2: If that this transforming does not happens hold that assuming and this substantiating happens. fact3: That this resettlement does not occurs leads to that that poetising sexlessness occurs and this upness occurs. fact4: If the fact that this creeping counterplot happens and this transforming happens is wrong then this transforming does not happens. fact5: If that poetising sexlessness occurs this unpretendingness does not happens.

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

This unpretendingness does not happens.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this wrangling occurs and this resettlement does not happens is triggered by that that assuming happens. fact2: If that this transforming does not happens hold that assuming and this substantiating happens. fact3: That this resettlement does not occurs leads to that that poetising sexlessness occurs and this upness occurs. fact4: If the fact that this creeping counterplot happens and this transforming happens is wrong then this transforming does not happens. fact5: If that poetising sexlessness occurs this unpretendingness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This unpretendingness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This closet does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: Both this leakage and this humanisation happens if this shrieking does not occurs. fact2: This subordinating kinship does not happens if that this lighting teratoma does not happens but that bractealness occurs does not hold. fact3: That this profanation happens is not false if that misguiding fief happens. fact4: That amendment does not occurs and that catechesis occurs if this humanisation occurs. fact5: If that finances does not occurs this closet happens and that pratfall happens. fact6: The fact that notthe disrobing but that Sunnah happens does not hold. fact7: If that pratfall does not happens then this closet does not happens and/or this paralyzing pomposity does not occurs. fact8: If this closet occurs then the fact that the disrobing does not occurs but that Sunnah happens does not hold. fact9: If notthis subordinating kinship but this lighting teratoma occurs then that finances does not occurs. fact10: That saunter occurs and the crystalliseding Spielberg happens if this repossessing unadaptability does not happens. fact11: The fossorialness does not occurs. fact12: If this profanation occurs this repossessing unadaptability does not occurs and this casualty does not occurs. fact13: If this closet does not occurs or this paralyzing pomposity does not happens or both then this paralyzing pomposity does not happens. fact14: If that saunter happens the fact that notthis lighting teratoma but that bractealness occurs does not hold. fact15: The fact that the disrobing does not happens and that Sunnah does not occurs is false if this closet occurs. fact16: That Sunnah does not occurs. fact17: That misguiding fief is brought about by that that amendment does not happens and that catechesis occurs. fact18: If this subordinating kinship does not occurs that pratfall does not occurs but that finances occurs.

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

Let's assume that this closet occurs.

{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both this leakage and this humanisation happens if this shrieking does not occurs. fact2: This subordinating kinship does not happens if that this lighting teratoma does not happens but that bractealness occurs does not hold. fact3: That this profanation happens is not false if that misguiding fief happens. fact4: That amendment does not occurs and that catechesis occurs if this humanisation occurs. fact5: If that finances does not occurs this closet happens and that pratfall happens. fact6: The fact that notthe disrobing but that Sunnah happens does not hold. fact7: If that pratfall does not happens then this closet does not happens and/or this paralyzing pomposity does not occurs. fact8: If this closet occurs then the fact that the disrobing does not occurs but that Sunnah happens does not hold. fact9: If notthis subordinating kinship but this lighting teratoma occurs then that finances does not occurs. fact10: That saunter occurs and the crystalliseding Spielberg happens if this repossessing unadaptability does not happens. fact11: The fossorialness does not occurs. fact12: If this profanation occurs this repossessing unadaptability does not occurs and this casualty does not occurs. fact13: If this closet does not occurs or this paralyzing pomposity does not happens or both then this paralyzing pomposity does not happens. fact14: If that saunter happens the fact that notthis lighting teratoma but that bractealness occurs does not hold. fact15: The fact that the disrobing does not happens and that Sunnah does not occurs is false if this closet occurs. fact16: That Sunnah does not occurs. fact17: That misguiding fief is brought about by that that amendment does not happens and that catechesis occurs. fact18: If this subordinating kinship does not occurs that pratfall does not occurs but that finances occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This closet does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this aminoplast is a propagandist and it dogmatize is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: If that the portulaca dogmatizes is right this aminoplast dogmatizes. fact2: The portulaca dogmatizes. fact3: If there exists somebody such that that he/she is not a bargain and/or he/she is a propagandist is wrong then this hipbone is a bargain. fact4: If the portulaca is narcotic then this aminoplast is narcotic.

fact1: {C}{b} -> {C}{a} fact2: {C}{b} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{BU}x v {A}x) -> {BU}{as} fact4: {B}{b} -> {B}{a}

This hipbone is a kind of a bargain that dogmatizes.

({BU}{as} & {C}{as})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that the portulaca dogmatizes is right this aminoplast dogmatizes. fact2: The portulaca dogmatizes. fact3: If there exists somebody such that that he/she is not a bargain and/or he/she is a propagandist is wrong then this hipbone is a bargain. fact4: If the portulaca is narcotic then this aminoplast is narcotic. ; $hypothesis$ = That this aminoplast is a propagandist and it dogmatize is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That crowbait is a Irak.

{A}{a}

fact1: if either that non-undueness or this cadetship or both happens that sponsoring defeatism does not occurs.

fact1: fake_formula

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: if either that non-undueness or this cadetship or both happens that sponsoring defeatism does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That crowbait is a Irak. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That butch invalidates PST.

{D}{a}

fact1: That butch does not invalidate PST if that butch Rices and she/he times inconceivableness. fact2: That pelmet Rices. fact3: If Tracey invalidates PST then that butch invalidates PST. fact4: If that butch does not raise this reveller invalidates PST. fact5: this inconceivableness times butch. fact6: Something does not Rice if the fact that it is a ski and it Rice is false. fact7: If someone does not time inconceivableness the fact that it Rices and does not raise does not hold. fact8: If that butch ingrains and is a skedaddle that butch is not a kind of a unionism. fact9: If Tracey does not time inconceivableness then that the fact that that butch is a kind of a ski and it does Rice is incorrect is true. fact10: The cambric is not unintrusive if it is a FARC that invalidates PST. fact11: That something does not time inconceivableness and is a rescript is not wrong if that it needles solarisation is correct. fact12: There exists some person such that the fact that he is not a ski and is not a rescript is incorrect. fact13: That butch raises. fact14: That butch times inconceivableness. fact15: If that that butch raises hold then that butch Rices.

fact1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact2: {B}{gs} fact3: {D}{b} -> {D}{a} fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> {D}{hi} fact5: {AA}{aa} fact6: (x): ¬({E}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact8: ({BC}{a} & {ET}{a}) -> ¬{DM}{a} fact9: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({E}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: ({AB}{ho} & {D}{ho}) -> ¬{HB}{ho} fact11: (x): {G}x -> (¬{C}x & {F}x) fact12: (Ex): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) fact13: {A}{a} fact14: {C}{a} fact15: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}

That butch invalidates PST.

{D}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That butch does not invalidate PST if that butch Rices and she/he times inconceivableness. fact2: That pelmet Rices. fact3: If Tracey invalidates PST then that butch invalidates PST. fact4: If that butch does not raise this reveller invalidates PST. fact5: this inconceivableness times butch. fact6: Something does not Rice if the fact that it is a ski and it Rice is false. fact7: If someone does not time inconceivableness the fact that it Rices and does not raise does not hold. fact8: If that butch ingrains and is a skedaddle that butch is not a kind of a unionism. fact9: If Tracey does not time inconceivableness then that the fact that that butch is a kind of a ski and it does Rice is incorrect is true. fact10: The cambric is not unintrusive if it is a FARC that invalidates PST. fact11: That something does not time inconceivableness and is a rescript is not wrong if that it needles solarisation is correct. fact12: There exists some person such that the fact that he is not a ski and is not a rescript is incorrect. fact13: That butch raises. fact14: That butch times inconceivableness. fact15: If that that butch raises hold then that butch Rices. ; $hypothesis$ = That butch invalidates PST. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact13 -> int1: That that butch Rices is true.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That butch Rices and does time inconceivableness.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That the fact that everyone is a kind of a Sardis is true does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything is a wigging. fact2: If somebody is not Boeotian she is a kind of a cancelled and she is a Sardis. fact3: Everybody homesteads focused. fact4: If some man does not invert ankylosis then it does not service incongruousness and it is underprivileged. fact5: If some man does not service incongruousness and is underprivileged then it is not non-Boeotian. fact6: Everybody does not invert ankylosis. fact7: Everything is a hl. fact8: Everything is Boeotian. fact9: The fact that every man organises Geometridae hold. fact10: Everything is nonresonant. fact11: Everybody is an ebullience.

fact1: (x): {F}x fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({GF}x & {A}x) fact3: (x): {GH}x fact4: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) fact5: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): ¬{E}x fact7: (x): {FT}x fact8: (x): {B}x fact9: (x): {EN}x fact10: (x): {H}x fact11: (x): {Q}x

Everybody is not non-platyrhine.

(x): {HK}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a wigging. fact2: If somebody is not Boeotian she is a kind of a cancelled and she is a Sardis. fact3: Everybody homesteads focused. fact4: If some man does not invert ankylosis then it does not service incongruousness and it is underprivileged. fact5: If some man does not service incongruousness and is underprivileged then it is not non-Boeotian. fact6: Everybody does not invert ankylosis. fact7: Everything is a hl. fact8: Everything is Boeotian. fact9: The fact that every man organises Geometridae hold. fact10: Everything is nonresonant. fact11: Everybody is an ebullience. ; $hypothesis$ = That the fact that everyone is a kind of a Sardis is true does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that there exists something such that it is a Latinae does not hold.

¬((Ex): {A}x)

fact1: If that thaumaturge is carven it debauches Pleuronectes. fact2: Everything does not disambiguate USACIL. fact3: Somebody is a Mafia. fact4: There exists someone such that it is a kind of a Fosbury. fact5: Something is a AHPCRC. fact6: Some person is a savourlessness if she debauches Pleuronectes. fact7: There is something such that this thing is a kind of a Latinae. fact8: That thaumaturge is unsaturated if it is unemotional. fact9: Someone strains palaetiology. fact10: If this cladode is not carven then that thaumaturge is a kind of a savourlessness that debauches Pleuronectes. fact11: If that haywire is not saturated then that that dockworker is carven but it is not unemotional does not hold. fact12: If something does not disambiguate USACIL it is not unhumorous and BARS Capricornus. fact13: Some person is a clamoring if it is a Latinae. fact14: The fact that something is not a Latinae and it is not a carmaker does not hold if it is a savourlessness. fact15: If some man is a Latinae then this one is a whiskers. fact16: Something ribs indiction. fact17: If something is a kind of a savourlessness it is a Latinae. fact18: This cladode is not carven if the fact that that dockworker is carven and is not unemotional does not hold. fact19: Someone is carven if the one is unsaturated. fact20: Some person does chauffeur Pyrrosia. fact21: If that that some person is not a Latinae and not a carmaker hold does not hold she/he is a carmaker.

fact1: {D}{a} -> {C}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{I}x fact3: (Ex): {HQ}x fact4: (Ex): {CK}x fact5: (Ex): {GD}x fact6: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact7: (Ex): {A}x fact8: {F}{a} -> {E}{a} fact9: (Ex): {HS}x fact10: ¬{D}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) fact11: {E}{d} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact12: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{H}x & {G}x) fact13: (x): {A}x -> {AF}x fact14: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{BN}x) fact15: (x): {A}x -> {BI}x fact16: (Ex): {JG}x fact17: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact18: ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact19: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact20: (Ex): {HP}x fact21: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{BN}x) -> {BN}x

There exists some person such that it is a whiskers.

(Ex): {BI}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that thaumaturge is carven it debauches Pleuronectes. fact2: Everything does not disambiguate USACIL. fact3: Somebody is a Mafia. fact4: There exists someone such that it is a kind of a Fosbury. fact5: Something is a AHPCRC. fact6: Some person is a savourlessness if she debauches Pleuronectes. fact7: There is something such that this thing is a kind of a Latinae. fact8: That thaumaturge is unsaturated if it is unemotional. fact9: Someone strains palaetiology. fact10: If this cladode is not carven then that thaumaturge is a kind of a savourlessness that debauches Pleuronectes. fact11: If that haywire is not saturated then that that dockworker is carven but it is not unemotional does not hold. fact12: If something does not disambiguate USACIL it is not unhumorous and BARS Capricornus. fact13: Some person is a clamoring if it is a Latinae. fact14: The fact that something is not a Latinae and it is not a carmaker does not hold if it is a savourlessness. fact15: If some man is a Latinae then this one is a whiskers. fact16: Something ribs indiction. fact17: If something is a kind of a savourlessness it is a Latinae. fact18: This cladode is not carven if the fact that that dockworker is carven and is not unemotional does not hold. fact19: Someone is carven if the one is unsaturated. fact20: Some person does chauffeur Pyrrosia. fact21: If that that some person is not a Latinae and not a carmaker hold does not hold she/he is a carmaker. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists something such that it is a Latinae does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That decreeing occurs.

{C}

fact1: If that that deicing does not occurs and this encouraging Psetta does not occurs is wrong then this hormonalness occurs. fact2: If this savingsing achromia does not occurs but that guy happens then that observing does not happens. fact3: If that that observing does not occurs is true then this protecting occurs but that Nativity does not occurs. fact4: That concubinage occurs. fact5: Both that decreeing and that subsonicness occurs if this hormonalness does not happens. fact6: That this hormonalness and/or that decreeing happens is caused by that this wrecking does not happens. fact7: That that subsonicness happens is triggered by that this wrecking and this non-apoplecticness happens. fact8: The fact that the subordinating bulging does not occurs and that intervening Berkshires does not happens is incorrect if that subsonicness does not happens. fact9: That guy occurs. fact10: That that deicing but notthis encouraging Psetta happens is wrong. fact11: This savingsing achromia does not occurs and that guy does not occurs if this winding Bittacidae does not occurs. fact12: This hormonalness does not occurs if this wrecking does not occurs and that apoplecticness does not occurs. fact13: This wrecking happens. fact14: That that deicing does not occurs and this encouraging Psetta does not occurs is false. fact15: If this protecting happens and that Nativity does not occurs then this wrecking does not happens. fact16: The fact that that deicing does not occurs but this encouraging Psetta occurs does not hold. fact17: This wrecking happens and that apoplecticness does not occurs. fact18: That this starting occurs and this oppositeness occurs yields that that darting does not occurs. fact19: Either that observing or this protecting or both is caused by that this savingsing achromia does not happens. fact20: The fact that the rucking agnation does not happens and the amphitropousness does not happens is incorrect. fact21: If both the extroversiveness and this non-spermaticness occurs the retrofit happens. fact22: This savingsing achromia occurs. fact23: If both the citrousness and the graft happens this microsomalness does not happens. fact24: If that Nativity happens this wrecking does not happens and that apoplecticness happens. fact25: If that subsonicness occurs and this hormonalness occurs that decreeing does not happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact2: (¬{I} & {J}) -> ¬{H} fact3: ¬{H} -> ({G} & ¬{F}) fact4: {GL} fact5: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact6: ¬{D} -> ({B} v {C}) fact7: ({D} & ¬{E}) -> {A} fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{BQ} & ¬{N}) fact9: {J} fact10: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact11: ¬{K} -> (¬{I} & ¬{J}) fact12: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} fact13: {D} fact14: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact15: ({G} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact16: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact17: ({D} & ¬{E}) fact18: ({CQ} & {FQ}) -> ¬{AF} fact19: ¬{I} -> ({H} v {G}) fact20: ¬(¬{O} & ¬{CD}) fact21: ({CL} & ¬{HE}) -> {AQ} fact22: {I} fact23: ({IB} & {EG}) -> ¬{CI} fact24: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact25: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C}

The fact that the subordinating bulging does not occurs and that intervening Berkshires does not happens does not hold.

¬(¬{BQ} & ¬{N})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that deicing does not occurs and this encouraging Psetta does not occurs is wrong then this hormonalness occurs. fact2: If this savingsing achromia does not occurs but that guy happens then that observing does not happens. fact3: If that that observing does not occurs is true then this protecting occurs but that Nativity does not occurs. fact4: That concubinage occurs. fact5: Both that decreeing and that subsonicness occurs if this hormonalness does not happens. fact6: That this hormonalness and/or that decreeing happens is caused by that this wrecking does not happens. fact7: That that subsonicness happens is triggered by that this wrecking and this non-apoplecticness happens. fact8: The fact that the subordinating bulging does not occurs and that intervening Berkshires does not happens is incorrect if that subsonicness does not happens. fact9: That guy occurs. fact10: That that deicing but notthis encouraging Psetta happens is wrong. fact11: This savingsing achromia does not occurs and that guy does not occurs if this winding Bittacidae does not occurs. fact12: This hormonalness does not occurs if this wrecking does not occurs and that apoplecticness does not occurs. fact13: This wrecking happens. fact14: That that deicing does not occurs and this encouraging Psetta does not occurs is false. fact15: If this protecting happens and that Nativity does not occurs then this wrecking does not happens. fact16: The fact that that deicing does not occurs but this encouraging Psetta occurs does not hold. fact17: This wrecking happens and that apoplecticness does not occurs. fact18: That this starting occurs and this oppositeness occurs yields that that darting does not occurs. fact19: Either that observing or this protecting or both is caused by that this savingsing achromia does not happens. fact20: The fact that the rucking agnation does not happens and the amphitropousness does not happens is incorrect. fact21: If both the extroversiveness and this non-spermaticness occurs the retrofit happens. fact22: This savingsing achromia occurs. fact23: If both the citrousness and the graft happens this microsomalness does not happens. fact24: If that Nativity happens this wrecking does not happens and that apoplecticness happens. fact25: If that subsonicness occurs and this hormonalness occurs that decreeing does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That decreeing occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact14 -> int1: This hormonalness occurs.; fact17 & fact7 -> int2: That subsonicness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That subsonicness and this hormonalness occurs.; int3 & fact25 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This cockfight happens.

{B}

fact1: That nonfissionableness occurs. fact2: The contenting mebibit does not occurs. fact3: The orthodoxness happens. fact4: The tenderization does not happens if the browning Andira occurs and the ossicularness does not occurs. fact5: That both the eurythmy and the philippic happens brings about that the snag does not happens. fact6: This cockfight is prevented by that both that profession and that non-riblessness occurs. fact7: If the monochromaticness happens and that stops does not happens then that nonfissionableness does not occurs. fact8: That the synchronizing paraparesis and that non-beaklessness occurs brings about that this breaone junta does not occurs. fact9: That Romaniness but notthe sashay occurs. fact10: This photometricalness but notthe miaow occurs. fact11: If the orthodoxness happens that profession occurs and this riblessness does not occurs. fact12: That the dissevering does not happens is brought about by that the extortion but notthe nauticalness happens. fact13: That the bratticing Oedogoniaceae occurs is right.

fact1: {ER} fact2: ¬{FA} fact3: {A} fact4: ({GQ} & ¬{FK}) -> ¬{AI} fact5: ({BJ} & {JD}) -> ¬{BR} fact6: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact7: ({EQ} & ¬{DC}) -> ¬{ER} fact8: ({IJ} & ¬{EH}) -> ¬{AU} fact9: ({JE} & ¬{CA}) fact10: ({IF} & ¬{GU}) fact11: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact12: ({BM} & ¬{DJ}) -> ¬{FT} fact13: {AP}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That nonfissionableness occurs. fact2: The contenting mebibit does not occurs. fact3: The orthodoxness happens. fact4: The tenderization does not happens if the browning Andira occurs and the ossicularness does not occurs. fact5: That both the eurythmy and the philippic happens brings about that the snag does not happens. fact6: This cockfight is prevented by that both that profession and that non-riblessness occurs. fact7: If the monochromaticness happens and that stops does not happens then that nonfissionableness does not occurs. fact8: That the synchronizing paraparesis and that non-beaklessness occurs brings about that this breaone junta does not occurs. fact9: That Romaniness but notthe sashay occurs. fact10: This photometricalness but notthe miaow occurs. fact11: If the orthodoxness happens that profession occurs and this riblessness does not occurs. fact12: That the dissevering does not happens is brought about by that the extortion but notthe nauticalness happens. fact13: That the bratticing Oedogoniaceae occurs is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This cockfight happens. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact3 -> int1: Both that profession and the ribbedness occurs.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This symptomaticness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: This symptomaticness happens if this good does not occurs. fact2: If the fact that that encouraging Flacourtia and that finiteness occurs does not hold that encouraging Flacourtia does not occurs. fact3: That the gilding thirties does not happens prevents that that televising Beira does not occurs. fact4: If the variance does not happens then the energizing Hibbing occurs. fact5: The burlesque occurs and this featherlessness occurs. fact6: That biogeneticness occurs. fact7: The straddle happens. fact8: That that refinement does not happens leads to this splicing Holothuria. fact9: This motion occurs. fact10: That this good occurs is prevented by that that thinnedness happens and that bungling occurs. fact11: That bungling occurs. fact12: The macrocephalicness happens. fact13: The disdainfulness happens. fact14: If this dermabrasion does not happens the fact that that encouraging Flacourtia occurs and that finiteness occurs is not true. fact15: The unbalconiedness happens. fact16: That anodalness happens. fact17: That genuineness happens. fact18: That thinnedness occurs. fact19: If that encouraging Flacourtia does not occurs this good and this federal occurs. fact20: That the non-Celticness triggers that that twinning anthrax happens is not false. fact21: That that subjugation happens and/or this sleeping greediness does not occurs is brought about by that that stopping Laputa does not occurs. fact22: The cracking does not happens. fact23: The measuring Morrigan happens.

fact1: ¬{C} -> {D} fact2: ¬({F} & {G}) -> ¬{F} fact3: ¬{EU} -> {AQ} fact4: ¬{O} -> {HF} fact5: ({FT} & {ED}) fact6: {HN} fact7: {FE} fact8: ¬{R} -> {ET} fact9: {DL} fact10: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact11: {B} fact12: {HQ} fact13: {DR} fact14: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {G}) fact15: {AS} fact16: {GQ} fact17: {HS} fact18: {A} fact19: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) fact20: ¬{Q} -> {FA} fact21: ¬{K} -> ({J} v ¬{I}) fact22: ¬{AG} fact23: {BP}

This symptomaticness does not happens.

¬{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This symptomaticness happens if this good does not occurs. fact2: If the fact that that encouraging Flacourtia and that finiteness occurs does not hold that encouraging Flacourtia does not occurs. fact3: That the gilding thirties does not happens prevents that that televising Beira does not occurs. fact4: If the variance does not happens then the energizing Hibbing occurs. fact5: The burlesque occurs and this featherlessness occurs. fact6: That biogeneticness occurs. fact7: The straddle happens. fact8: That that refinement does not happens leads to this splicing Holothuria. fact9: This motion occurs. fact10: That this good occurs is prevented by that that thinnedness happens and that bungling occurs. fact11: That bungling occurs. fact12: The macrocephalicness happens. fact13: The disdainfulness happens. fact14: If this dermabrasion does not happens the fact that that encouraging Flacourtia occurs and that finiteness occurs is not true. fact15: The unbalconiedness happens. fact16: That anodalness happens. fact17: That genuineness happens. fact18: That thinnedness occurs. fact19: If that encouraging Flacourtia does not occurs this good and this federal occurs. fact20: That the non-Celticness triggers that that twinning anthrax happens is not false. fact21: That that subjugation happens and/or this sleeping greediness does not occurs is brought about by that that stopping Laputa does not occurs. fact22: The cracking does not happens. fact23: The measuring Morrigan happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This symptomaticness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact18 & fact11 -> int1: That thinnedness occurs and that bungling happens.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: This good does not happens.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there exists something such that if the thing is a kind of a polishing that the thing does not center leu and fights congeniality is not correct is wrong.

¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

fact1: That Steve does not center leu but the thing fights congeniality does not hold if the fact that Steve is a kind of a polishing is right. fact2: The fact that something is not paediatric but the thing is euphonic is incorrect if the thing is a motion. fact3: There is some man such that if the one is a polishing then the one does not center leu and fights congeniality. fact4: The fact that Steve is not a kind of a Buxaceae and is a polishing is incorrect if it is a modal. fact5: If Steve is a polishing the fact that Steve does center leu and that fights congeniality does not hold. fact6: There is something such that if that thing is a polishing the fact that that that thing centers leu and does fight congeniality hold does not hold. fact7: The fact that Steve does not ignite Leymus but it is expiative is wrong if it centers leu. fact8: If Steve is a polishing Steve does not center leu and fights congeniality. fact9: That Steve is not unmalicious and fights congeniality is incorrect if Steve is valent.

fact1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact2: (x): {U}x -> ¬(¬{BQ}x & {B}x) fact3: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact4: {BD}{aa} -> ¬(¬{CK}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: {AA}{aa} -> ¬(¬{IR}{aa} & {DS}{aa}) fact8: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact9: {E}{aa} -> ¬(¬{EL}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

There is something such that if the thing is a motion then the fact that the thing is not paediatric and the thing is euphonic is wrong.

(Ex): {U}x -> ¬(¬{BQ}x & {B}x)

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That Steve does not center leu but the thing fights congeniality does not hold if the fact that Steve is a kind of a polishing is right. fact2: The fact that something is not paediatric but the thing is euphonic is incorrect if the thing is a motion. fact3: There is some man such that if the one is a polishing then the one does not center leu and fights congeniality. fact4: The fact that Steve is not a kind of a Buxaceae and is a polishing is incorrect if it is a modal. fact5: If Steve is a polishing the fact that Steve does center leu and that fights congeniality does not hold. fact6: There is something such that if that thing is a polishing the fact that that that thing centers leu and does fight congeniality hold does not hold. fact7: The fact that Steve does not ignite Leymus but it is expiative is wrong if it centers leu. fact8: If Steve is a polishing Steve does not center leu and fights congeniality. fact9: That Steve is not unmalicious and fights congeniality is incorrect if Steve is valent. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists something such that if the thing is a kind of a polishing that the thing does not center leu and fights congeniality is not correct is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that schoolroom is ventral and/or he does not offer lowercase does not hold.

¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a})

fact1: Everything is not a kind of an active. fact2: Something glowers dictated. fact3: There are non-ventral ones. fact4: The fact that that schoolroom is ventral and/or does not offer lowercase does not hold if there exists something such that it does not glower dictated. fact5: Something does not glower dictated. fact6: Something does not transition kopeck if it is not a kind of an active. fact7: That that schoolroom offers lowercase hold if there exists somebody such that the person does not glower dictated. fact8: That that mummer is important and/or does not bilges Thespis is incorrect if there exists something such that the thing does not appall. fact9: That schoolroom offers lowercase. fact10: The fact that that schoolroom patronises insolvency or it is not a Goodeniaceae or both does not hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{E}x fact2: (Ex): {A}x fact3: (Ex): ¬{B}x fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) fact5: (Ex): ¬{A}x fact6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{D}x fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> {C}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{CF}x -> ¬({AB}{e} v ¬{GA}{e}) fact9: {C}{a} fact10: ¬({BN}{a} v ¬{JE}{a})

That schoolroom is ventral and/or does not offer lowercase.

({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is not a kind of an active. fact2: Something glowers dictated. fact3: There are non-ventral ones. fact4: The fact that that schoolroom is ventral and/or does not offer lowercase does not hold if there exists something such that it does not glower dictated. fact5: Something does not glower dictated. fact6: Something does not transition kopeck if it is not a kind of an active. fact7: That that schoolroom offers lowercase hold if there exists somebody such that the person does not glower dictated. fact8: That that mummer is important and/or does not bilges Thespis is incorrect if there exists something such that the thing does not appall. fact9: That schoolroom offers lowercase. fact10: The fact that that schoolroom patronises insolvency or it is not a Goodeniaceae or both does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that schoolroom is ventral and/or he does not offer lowercase does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

There exists some man such that that that person is not a Swietinia and that person does not demoralize laudableness does not hold.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There exists some person such that the fact that it does not Wed diabetes and is not a Sphingidae is false. fact2: Something is not a Swietinia and does not demoralize laudableness. fact3: There exists something such that the fact that that it is not a synaesthesia and is not a weightlift is true is wrong. fact4: There exists something such that the fact that the thing is not a kind of a Dukas and the thing is not lexicographic does not hold. fact5: There exists some person such that the fact that it does not pad Sorbus and is not a weightlift is false. fact6: There exists something such that the fact that it is not a Swietinia and demoralizes laudableness is wrong. fact7: There exists some man such that that that person is not a Swietinia and that person does not demoralize laudableness does not hold. fact8: There is some man such that that he/she is not a contractility and not colorectal does not hold. fact9: There is someone such that the fact that it is a Swietinia and it does not demoralize laudableness does not hold.

fact1: (Ex): ¬(¬{HQ}x & ¬{FM}x) fact2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (Ex): ¬(¬{HS}x & ¬{FU}x) fact4: (Ex): ¬(¬{JG}x & ¬{IP}x) fact5: (Ex): ¬(¬{FT}x & ¬{FU}x) fact6: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact8: (Ex): ¬(¬{EH}x & ¬{DR}x) fact9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some person such that the fact that it does not Wed diabetes and is not a Sphingidae is false. fact2: Something is not a Swietinia and does not demoralize laudableness. fact3: There exists something such that the fact that that it is not a synaesthesia and is not a weightlift is true is wrong. fact4: There exists something such that the fact that the thing is not a kind of a Dukas and the thing is not lexicographic does not hold. fact5: There exists some person such that the fact that it does not pad Sorbus and is not a weightlift is false. fact6: There exists something such that the fact that it is not a Swietinia and demoralizes laudableness is wrong. fact7: There exists some man such that that that person is not a Swietinia and that person does not demoralize laudableness does not hold. fact8: There is some man such that that he/she is not a contractility and not colorectal does not hold. fact9: There is someone such that the fact that it is a Swietinia and it does not demoralize laudableness does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some man such that that that person is not a Swietinia and that person does not demoralize laudableness does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This instigator is not a kind of a Alzheimers.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Something that is not a kind of a ngwee is superlunar and is a mishmash. fact2: This instigator is not a Alzheimers if the fact that that darter is a Alzheimers is true. fact3: If someone is a ngwee it is not a mishmash and/or it is superlunar. fact4: This instigator is a ngwee if that this instigator does worsted clogging and does not smart loving is false. fact5: Linda is a kind of a Alzheimers if this instigator is not a mishmash and/or is superlunar. fact6: If this inga worsteds clogging this inga is not a ngwee.

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

Linda is a kind of a Alzheimers.

{A}{be}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that is not a kind of a ngwee is superlunar and is a mishmash. fact2: This instigator is not a Alzheimers if the fact that that darter is a Alzheimers is true. fact3: If someone is a ngwee it is not a mishmash and/or it is superlunar. fact4: This instigator is a ngwee if that this instigator does worsted clogging and does not smart loving is false. fact5: Linda is a kind of a Alzheimers if this instigator is not a mishmash and/or is superlunar. fact6: If this inga worsteds clogging this inga is not a ngwee. ; $hypothesis$ = This instigator is not a kind of a Alzheimers. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is nothing that is a kind of non-planktonic thing that is not a Nanchang.

(x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There is no one that is a kind of a MacDowell that does not board. fact2: There is nothing such that it is temperate and it is not a kind of a conversance. fact3: There exists no person such that that person is not a distaste and is not slighting. fact4: The fact that everybody is both not a Diocletian and honourable is true. fact5: There exists nobody such that the person is a kind of an interstate that does not inhumed hypallage. fact6: There exists no man such that the one is not a Elymus and the one does not squabble GPO. fact7: Everyone is cardiac. fact8: There is no man such that she is not non-planktonic and is not a kind of a Nanchang. fact9: There exists none that is not a Anzio and does not petrify. fact10: Somebody that is cardiac is a debugger. fact11: There is no one such that it does not resign Centaurus and is not honourable. fact12: If some person is not a Phylloporus then that that one is not indivisible and that one is not a blacking is false. fact13: There exists nobody that is not planktonic and is a Nanchang. fact14: There exists nobody that is not a kind of a chiseled and complains. fact15: There exists no man such that this person does not defuse Paracelsus and this person is a debugger.

fact1: (x): ¬({EK}x & ¬{IF}x) fact2: (x): ¬({EL}x & ¬{AR}x) fact3: (x): ¬(¬{EC}x & ¬{EE}x) fact4: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) fact5: (x): ¬({FQ}x & ¬{BJ}x) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{BI}x) fact7: (x): {E}x fact8: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{S}x & ¬{EF}x) fact10: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact11: (x): ¬(¬{EN}x & ¬{C}x) fact12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AL}x & ¬{CB}x) fact13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact14: (x): ¬(¬{AU}x & {GC}x) fact15: (x): ¬(¬{IL}x & {D}x)

There exists nobody such that this one is not indivisible and this one is not a blacking.

(x): ¬(¬{AL}x & ¬{CB}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is no one that is a kind of a MacDowell that does not board. fact2: There is nothing such that it is temperate and it is not a kind of a conversance. fact3: There exists no person such that that person is not a distaste and is not slighting. fact4: The fact that everybody is both not a Diocletian and honourable is true. fact5: There exists nobody such that the person is a kind of an interstate that does not inhumed hypallage. fact6: There exists no man such that the one is not a Elymus and the one does not squabble GPO. fact7: Everyone is cardiac. fact8: There is no man such that she is not non-planktonic and is not a kind of a Nanchang. fact9: There exists none that is not a Anzio and does not petrify. fact10: Somebody that is cardiac is a debugger. fact11: There is no one such that it does not resign Centaurus and is not honourable. fact12: If some person is not a Phylloporus then that that one is not indivisible and that one is not a blacking is false. fact13: There exists nobody that is not planktonic and is a Nanchang. fact14: There exists nobody that is not a kind of a chiseled and complains. fact15: There exists no man such that this person does not defuse Paracelsus and this person is a debugger. ; $hypothesis$ = There is nothing that is a kind of non-planktonic thing that is not a Nanchang. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that this celeriac is not a Lutheran.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That sertraline sunbathes paleobotany and it is a Lutheran. fact2: That sertraline sunbathes paleobotany. fact3: That sertraline busies panegyric and sunbathes paleobotany. fact4: That sertraline is a Lutheran. fact5: If that this celeriac is not a kind of a Lutheran is true then that sertraline does not busy panegyric.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That sertraline sunbathes paleobotany and it is a Lutheran. fact2: That sertraline sunbathes paleobotany. fact3: That sertraline busies panegyric and sunbathes paleobotany. fact4: That sertraline is a Lutheran. fact5: If that this celeriac is not a kind of a Lutheran is true then that sertraline does not busy panegyric. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this celeriac is not a Lutheran. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this celeriac is not a Lutheran.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: That sertraline does not busy panegyric.; fact3 -> int2: That sertraline busies panegyric.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Mauritian is a kind of a tower.

{D}{b}

fact1: Something is a kind of non-Thai thing that does not degaussing vacuolisation if this thing does wire antiphony. fact2: If this broomweed does not degaussing vacuolisation and it is not a tower then that Mauritian is not non-Thai. fact3: There is something such that it is narial. fact4: Some man is a deist. fact5: Something that is a kind of a apercu does wire antiphony. fact6: If this broomweed is a tower then it does not degaussing vacuolisation and is Thai. fact7: If something does not degaussing vacuolisation it is a deist and parasympathetic. fact8: Something is not a kind of a tower if this thing is not a kind of a deist. fact9: That Mauritian is a kind of a tower if this broomweed does not degaussing vacuolisation and is not non-Thai. fact10: This broomweed does not degaussing vacuolisation and that person is not Thai if there exists some person such that that person is a kind of a deist.

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

Someone is parasympathetic.

(Ex): {BM}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a kind of non-Thai thing that does not degaussing vacuolisation if this thing does wire antiphony. fact2: If this broomweed does not degaussing vacuolisation and it is not a tower then that Mauritian is not non-Thai. fact3: There is something such that it is narial. fact4: Some man is a deist. fact5: Something that is a kind of a apercu does wire antiphony. fact6: If this broomweed is a tower then it does not degaussing vacuolisation and is Thai. fact7: If something does not degaussing vacuolisation it is a deist and parasympathetic. fact8: Something is not a kind of a tower if this thing is not a kind of a deist. fact9: That Mauritian is a kind of a tower if this broomweed does not degaussing vacuolisation and is not non-Thai. fact10: This broomweed does not degaussing vacuolisation and that person is not Thai if there exists some person such that that person is a kind of a deist. ; $hypothesis$ = That Mauritian is a kind of a tower. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this designating does not occurs and that adulteration does not occurs is false.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: If that droning Feb does not happens that adulteration does not occurs. fact2: That droning Feb does not happens. fact3: That that nighness does not occurs yields that that containerising gridlock does not happens and that phonologicalness does not happens. fact4: This peeking is prevented by that that containerising gridlock does not happens and that phonologicalness does not occurs. fact5: That adulteration does not happens. fact6: If this peeking does not happens that droning Feb happens but that exaggeration does not occurs. fact7: That nighness does not happens if that that picket does not happens is correct. fact8: If that insensitiveness and this neap occurs that picket does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that that droning Feb does not happens hold then this designating does not happens and that adulteration does not occurs. fact10: The insurgency does not happens.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} fact2: ¬{A} fact3: ¬{E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{C}) fact4: (¬{D} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{AB} fact6: ¬{B} -> ({A} & ¬{BP}) fact7: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} fact8: ({G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} fact9: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact10: ¬{HQ}

That exaggeration does not occurs.

¬{BP}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that droning Feb does not happens that adulteration does not occurs. fact2: That droning Feb does not happens. fact3: That that nighness does not occurs yields that that containerising gridlock does not happens and that phonologicalness does not happens. fact4: This peeking is prevented by that that containerising gridlock does not happens and that phonologicalness does not occurs. fact5: That adulteration does not happens. fact6: If this peeking does not happens that droning Feb happens but that exaggeration does not occurs. fact7: That nighness does not happens if that that picket does not happens is correct. fact8: If that insensitiveness and this neap occurs that picket does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that that droning Feb does not happens hold then this designating does not happens and that adulteration does not occurs. fact10: The insurgency does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this designating does not occurs and that adulteration does not occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That copier is adaptive but not a Hillel.

({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: That something is adaptive and is not a Hillel does not hold if this is lossy. fact2: This member is lossy and a counterrevolutionary if the one is not a thalweg. fact3: That this member edulcorates Cairo and is not scalene does not hold. fact4: That Herder is not a Aphidoidea. fact5: Yolanda is lossy. fact6: That copier is a dragging. fact7: If something is not a Aphidoidea this is not Bahai and this is a prestige. fact8: If that copier is lossy then the fact that this person is adaptive a Hillel is wrong. fact9: That Herder is adaptive if that that copier is not a thalweg and that thing is adaptive does not hold. fact10: That copier is a counterrevolutionary and he/she is lossy. fact11: That broadcloth is not scalene if the fact that this member edulcorates Cairo but that one is not scalene is incorrect. fact12: A non-lossy one is a deluge that is a counterrevolutionary. fact13: If the fact that that Herder is both not Bahai and a prestige is true that Herder is a kind of a Pithecia. fact14: If that broadcloth is not scalene then the fact that that that copier is not a thalweg and is not adaptive does not hold hold.

fact1: (x): {B}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) fact2: ¬{E}{c} -> ({B}{c} & {A}{c}) fact3: ¬({H}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact4: ¬{J}{ed} fact5: {B}{ih} fact6: {CM}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{J}x -> (¬{G}x & {I}x) fact8: {B}{a} -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) fact9: ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {D}{ed} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: ¬({H}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({GQ}x & {A}x) fact13: (¬{G}{ed} & {I}{ed}) -> {IJ}{ed} fact14: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{D}{a})

That Herder is a deluge and it is a Pithecia.

({GQ}{ed} & {IJ}{ed})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That something is adaptive and is not a Hillel does not hold if this is lossy. fact2: This member is lossy and a counterrevolutionary if the one is not a thalweg. fact3: That this member edulcorates Cairo and is not scalene does not hold. fact4: That Herder is not a Aphidoidea. fact5: Yolanda is lossy. fact6: That copier is a dragging. fact7: If something is not a Aphidoidea this is not Bahai and this is a prestige. fact8: If that copier is lossy then the fact that this person is adaptive a Hillel is wrong. fact9: That Herder is adaptive if that that copier is not a thalweg and that thing is adaptive does not hold. fact10: That copier is a counterrevolutionary and he/she is lossy. fact11: That broadcloth is not scalene if the fact that this member edulcorates Cairo but that one is not scalene is incorrect. fact12: A non-lossy one is a deluge that is a counterrevolutionary. fact13: If the fact that that Herder is both not Bahai and a prestige is true that Herder is a kind of a Pithecia. fact14: If that broadcloth is not scalene then the fact that that that copier is not a thalweg and is not adaptive does not hold hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That copier is adaptive but not a Hillel. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That copier is lossy.; fact1 -> int2: If that copier is lossy that that copier is both adaptive and not a Hillel does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That there exists something such that it is a myoglobinuria and/or it is untrimmed is false.

¬((Ex): ({A}x v {B}x))

fact1: This skier freights Cachi. fact2: There is someone such that it is subcutaneous and/or is Pavlovian. fact3: That potterer is a myoglobinuria and/or that thing internalizes Yokohama. fact4: Something is protozoic and/or it is a MacArthur. fact5: That runaway is choleraic. fact6: There exists something such that either the thing is a Martes or the thing is a Akhenaten or both. fact7: That potterer is subcutaneous or it is a Umbellularia or both. fact8: The fact that that potterer is a kind of a wild is true. fact9: The fact that that potterer is plumbous is not false. fact10: That potterer is untrimmed. fact11: That acacia is a broad. fact12: That potterer is a religionism. fact13: That specs caters sacredness if the person is a myoglobinuria. fact14: That antimycotic does anguished knightliness and/or supports dreaded. fact15: There is something such that the thing is a Euascomycetes and/or the thing freights Cachi. fact16: That potterer is a religionism and/or a myoglobinuria. fact17: That potterer is psychopharmacological. fact18: That potterer is a myoglobinuria and/or is a kind of a blepharospasm. fact19: Somebody is legible and/or she/he is compressible. fact20: There exists some person such that either it bloodies or it speaks or both. fact21: That handwork disillusions sixtieth.

fact1: {DB}{r} fact2: (Ex): ({GL}x v {R}x) fact3: ({A}{a} v {IF}{a}) fact4: (Ex): ({DF}x v {FG}x) fact5: {BP}{iu} fact6: (Ex): ({O}x v {FI}x) fact7: ({GL}{a} v {HU}{a}) fact8: {GS}{a} fact9: {FP}{a} fact10: {B}{a} fact11: {GG}{iq} fact12: {IC}{a} fact13: {A}{o} -> {HQ}{o} fact14: ({FC}{hd} v {AK}{hd}) fact15: (Ex): ({JA}x v {DB}x) fact16: ({IC}{a} v {A}{a}) fact17: {EK}{a} fact18: ({A}{a} v {DR}{a}) fact19: (Ex): ({BA}x v {EU}x) fact20: (Ex): ({GU}x v {HG}x) fact21: {DC}{bp}

That specs is a religious and/or that thing caters sacredness.

({EI}{o} v {HQ}{o})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This skier freights Cachi. fact2: There is someone such that it is subcutaneous and/or is Pavlovian. fact3: That potterer is a myoglobinuria and/or that thing internalizes Yokohama. fact4: Something is protozoic and/or it is a MacArthur. fact5: That runaway is choleraic. fact6: There exists something such that either the thing is a Martes or the thing is a Akhenaten or both. fact7: That potterer is subcutaneous or it is a Umbellularia or both. fact8: The fact that that potterer is a kind of a wild is true. fact9: The fact that that potterer is plumbous is not false. fact10: That potterer is untrimmed. fact11: That acacia is a broad. fact12: That potterer is a religionism. fact13: That specs caters sacredness if the person is a myoglobinuria. fact14: That antimycotic does anguished knightliness and/or supports dreaded. fact15: There is something such that the thing is a Euascomycetes and/or the thing freights Cachi. fact16: That potterer is a religionism and/or a myoglobinuria. fact17: That potterer is psychopharmacological. fact18: That potterer is a myoglobinuria and/or is a kind of a blepharospasm. fact19: Somebody is legible and/or she/he is compressible. fact20: There exists some person such that either it bloodies or it speaks or both. fact21: That handwork disillusions sixtieth. ; $hypothesis$ = That there exists something such that it is a myoglobinuria and/or it is untrimmed is false. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: Either that potterer is a myoglobinuria or this one is untrimmed or both.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that Genevieve is a Wagram is correct.

{C}{c}

fact1: The joker hazards Willis. fact2: Genevieve is a Wagram if this perch is Czechoslovakian. fact3: Genevieve is Czechoslovakian if this perch is a kind of a Wagram. fact4: This structure hazards Willis. fact5: Something is a kind of Czechoslovakian thing that does encounter if it is not a Jimenez. fact6: Genevieve is polygonal. fact7: This perch is a Wagram. fact8: If Genevieve is Czechoslovakian this perch is a kind of a Wagram. fact9: If the fact that this structure is Czechoslovakian hold Genevieve does hazard Willis. fact10: Somebody is a kind of a Wagram if the fact that the one is not a Wagram and is Czechoslovakian is not correct. fact11: This perch brecciates. fact12: If this structure is Czechoslovakian this perch hazards Willis. fact13: If the fact that this perch is not a kind of a Nauruan but the person is a kind of a Jimenez is wrong then this structure is not a Jimenez. fact14: Genevieve does hazard Willis. fact15: This perch is geophysical. fact16: that Willis hazards structure. fact17: This caviar is a Wagram.

fact1: {A}{dj} fact2: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} fact3: {C}{b} -> {B}{c} fact4: {A}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) fact6: {IQ}{c} fact7: {C}{b} fact8: {B}{c} -> {C}{b} fact9: {B}{a} -> {A}{c} fact10: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> {C}x fact11: {DM}{b} fact12: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact13: ¬(¬{F}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact14: {A}{c} fact15: {DU}{b} fact16: {AA}{aa} fact17: {C}{fj}

This structure is a Wagram.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The joker hazards Willis. fact2: Genevieve is a Wagram if this perch is Czechoslovakian. fact3: Genevieve is Czechoslovakian if this perch is a kind of a Wagram. fact4: This structure hazards Willis. fact5: Something is a kind of Czechoslovakian thing that does encounter if it is not a Jimenez. fact6: Genevieve is polygonal. fact7: This perch is a Wagram. fact8: If Genevieve is Czechoslovakian this perch is a kind of a Wagram. fact9: If the fact that this structure is Czechoslovakian hold Genevieve does hazard Willis. fact10: Somebody is a kind of a Wagram if the fact that the one is not a Wagram and is Czechoslovakian is not correct. fact11: This perch brecciates. fact12: If this structure is Czechoslovakian this perch hazards Willis. fact13: If the fact that this perch is not a kind of a Nauruan but the person is a kind of a Jimenez is wrong then this structure is not a Jimenez. fact14: Genevieve does hazard Willis. fact15: This perch is geophysical. fact16: that Willis hazards structure. fact17: This caviar is a Wagram. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that Genevieve is a Wagram is correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That marang does throttle disparateness.

{A}{a}

fact1: that disparateness does throttle marang. fact2: This emitter does throttle disparateness and/or scorches if that coville is not a finish. fact3: If this emitter does scorch this proteinase does throttle disparateness. fact4: The bloater throttles disparateness. fact5: That marang does throttle disparateness. fact6: If this proteinase stabilises Merida and throttles disparateness that marang does not throttles disparateness. fact7: If some person is not a Bougainville or is not an anthropology or both it is not a kind of an anthropology. fact8: That marang is a artificiality. fact9: This proteinase throttles disparateness if this emitter does throttles disparateness. fact10: If the fact that somebody does not throne Aragon and is not a kind of a Turkmen does not hold it is a Turkmen. fact11: That that tomato does not throne Aragon and is not a Turkmen is incorrect if that that person is not Gallic is correct. fact12: If some man is a kind of a finish then she/he stabilises Merida. fact13: If that that tomato is a kind of Gallic one that is not a submarine does not hold it is not Gallic. fact14: Everything is non-asynergic and this thing is a kind of a frangibility. fact15: If that tomato is a Turkmen that coville is not a finish. fact16: Something is not a Bougainville or that is not an anthropology or both if that is non-asynergic. fact17: That that tomato is both not non-Gallic and not a submarine does not hold.

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

That marang does not throttle disparateness.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: that disparateness does throttle marang. fact2: This emitter does throttle disparateness and/or scorches if that coville is not a finish. fact3: If this emitter does scorch this proteinase does throttle disparateness. fact4: The bloater throttles disparateness. fact5: That marang does throttle disparateness. fact6: If this proteinase stabilises Merida and throttles disparateness that marang does not throttles disparateness. fact7: If some person is not a Bougainville or is not an anthropology or both it is not a kind of an anthropology. fact8: That marang is a artificiality. fact9: This proteinase throttles disparateness if this emitter does throttles disparateness. fact10: If the fact that somebody does not throne Aragon and is not a kind of a Turkmen does not hold it is a Turkmen. fact11: That that tomato does not throne Aragon and is not a Turkmen is incorrect if that that person is not Gallic is correct. fact12: If some man is a kind of a finish then she/he stabilises Merida. fact13: If that that tomato is a kind of Gallic one that is not a submarine does not hold it is not Gallic. fact14: Everything is non-asynergic and this thing is a kind of a frangibility. fact15: If that tomato is a Turkmen that coville is not a finish. fact16: Something is not a Bougainville or that is not an anthropology or both if that is non-asynergic. fact17: That that tomato is both not non-Gallic and not a submarine does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That marang does throttle disparateness. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The rushing happens.

{C}

fact1: This documentalness occurs. fact2: That this installing Zoisia occurs is triggered by that this documentalness occurs.

fact1: {A} fact2: {A} -> {B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This documentalness occurs. fact2: That this installing Zoisia occurs is triggered by that this documentalness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The rushing happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That prisonbreak happens.

{B}

fact1: That blare occurs. fact2: That blare brings about that this denouement occurs and/or that immunisation. fact3: That prisonbreak does not happens if this denouement does not happens or that immunisation occurs or both. fact4: Both that prisonbreak and that blare happens if this pressuring Ederle does not happens. fact5: If that blare occurs then this denouement does not occurs and/or that immunisation occurs.

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

That prisonbreak happens.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That blare occurs. fact2: That blare brings about that this denouement occurs and/or that immunisation. fact3: That prisonbreak does not happens if this denouement does not happens or that immunisation occurs or both. fact4: Both that prisonbreak and that blare happens if this pressuring Ederle does not happens. fact5: If that blare occurs then this denouement does not occurs and/or that immunisation occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That prisonbreak happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact1 -> int1: This denouement does not occurs or that immunisation happens or both.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Susy does not rail McCauley and is not Javan is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: If this polygamist is a regard this flop is both a puerility and not a Pithecolobium. fact2: Someone sees if she is unawakened. fact3: The fact that something does not rail McCauley and is not Javan is not correct if it ravishes NY. fact4: That caterpillar exists if that it tops incorruptness and it is not a kind of a obeah hold. fact5: The fact that the fact that Susy does not rail McCauley and is Javan is right is not correct if the fact that Susy ravishes NY is right. fact6: Susy exists if that caterpillar does exists. fact7: Susy does not rail McCauley and is not honourable if this teazel preconditions Poland. fact8: That caterpillar is not a kind of a psalm. fact9: That this teazel does precondition Poland and is not honourable does not hold. fact10: If some man that is a puerility is not a Pithecolobium then the person is unawakened. fact11: If the fact that that this teazel rails McCauley but it is not Javan hold is false Susy is honourable. fact12: If that caterpillar is not a kind of a psalm this thing tops incorruptness and is not a obeah. fact13: Somebody bombilates Seoul and it is a dial if it does not abdicate. fact14: Every person does not abdicate and she/he is not a tan. fact15: This polygamist is a regard if this nine bombilates Seoul. fact16: Something is honourable if that ravishes NY.

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

This nine is honourable.

{B}{e}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this polygamist is a regard this flop is both a puerility and not a Pithecolobium. fact2: Someone sees if she is unawakened. fact3: The fact that something does not rail McCauley and is not Javan is not correct if it ravishes NY. fact4: That caterpillar exists if that it tops incorruptness and it is not a kind of a obeah hold. fact5: The fact that the fact that Susy does not rail McCauley and is Javan is right is not correct if the fact that Susy ravishes NY is right. fact6: Susy exists if that caterpillar does exists. fact7: Susy does not rail McCauley and is not honourable if this teazel preconditions Poland. fact8: That caterpillar is not a kind of a psalm. fact9: That this teazel does precondition Poland and is not honourable does not hold. fact10: If some man that is a puerility is not a Pithecolobium then the person is unawakened. fact11: If the fact that that this teazel rails McCauley but it is not Javan hold is false Susy is honourable. fact12: If that caterpillar is not a kind of a psalm this thing tops incorruptness and is not a obeah. fact13: Somebody bombilates Seoul and it is a dial if it does not abdicate. fact14: Every person does not abdicate and she/he is not a tan. fact15: This polygamist is a regard if this nine bombilates Seoul. fact16: Something is honourable if that ravishes NY. ; $hypothesis$ = That Susy does not rail McCauley and is not Javan is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__