the fact that the pharmaceutical does not disown sorted and is tentacular is not correct if the jassid is not unidentifiable.
sent1: the fact that that the actomyosin does not disown sorted but it is a right is not true hold. sent2: the appeaser is a kind of a stone if it is a right and it is an eleven. sent3: if the jassid is a kind of a stone then the fact that the appeaser is identifiable but it is a kind of an eleven is not true. sent4: if the appeaser is a right that is not an eleven it is a kind of a stone. sent5: if the actomyosin does not disown sorted that the pharmaceutical does not disown sorted but it is tentacular is incorrect. sent6: the actomyosin does not disown sorted if it is not a organdy. sent7: there is something such that it is a stone. sent8: the appeaser is not a kind of an eleven. sent9: if the pharmaceutical is unidentifiable then that the jassid does disown sorted is not incorrect. sent10: if there exists something such that it is a organdy then the appeaser is a right but it is not an eleven. sent11: if the actomyosin is not a stone then the fact that the appeaser is not an eleven but it does disown sorted is false. sent12: the jassid is unidentifiable if the appeaser is a stone.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the actomyosin is a kind of a organdy.; assump2 -> int1: there is something such that that it is a organdy is correct.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the appeaser rights but it is not an eleven.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the appeaser is a stone.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the jassid is unidentifiable.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the jassid is not unidentifiable.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the actomyosin is not a organdy.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the actomyosin does not disown sorted.; int7 & sent5 -> int8: that the fact that the pharmaceutical does not disown sorted and is tentacular hold is not true.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the pharmaceutical does not disown sorted and is tentacular is not correct if the jassid is not unidentifiable. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the actomyosin does not disown sorted but it is a right is not true hold. sent2: the appeaser is a kind of a stone if it is a right and it is an eleven. sent3: if the jassid is a kind of a stone then the fact that the appeaser is identifiable but it is a kind of an eleven is not true. sent4: if the appeaser is a right that is not an eleven it is a kind of a stone. sent5: if the actomyosin does not disown sorted that the pharmaceutical does not disown sorted but it is tentacular is incorrect. sent6: the actomyosin does not disown sorted if it is not a organdy. sent7: there is something such that it is a stone. sent8: the appeaser is not a kind of an eleven. sent9: if the pharmaceutical is unidentifiable then that the jassid does disown sorted is not incorrect. sent10: if there exists something such that it is a organdy then the appeaser is a right but it is not an eleven. sent11: if the actomyosin is not a stone then the fact that the appeaser is not an eleven but it does disown sorted is false. sent12: the jassid is unidentifiable if the appeaser is a stone. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the actomyosin is a kind of a organdy.; assump2 -> int1: there is something such that that it is a organdy is correct.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the appeaser rights but it is not an eleven.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the appeaser is a stone.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the jassid is unidentifiable.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the jassid is not unidentifiable.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the actomyosin is not a organdy.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the actomyosin does not disown sorted.; int7 & sent5 -> int8: that the fact that the pharmaceutical does not disown sorted and is tentacular hold is not true.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__