that the steeplejack is prejudicial but it does not tarry is incorrect.
sent1: the liftman does tunnel steeplejack. sent2: the fact that the steeplejack is prejudicial but it does not tarry is not correct if the herbal is not prejudicial. sent3: if the solute is not an ordeal then the steeplejack is not an explorer and does tunnel steeplejack. sent4: the solute does not tarry. sent5: something is not an ordeal if it pecks Cercopithecus. sent6: the trolleybus does tunnel Light. sent7: either the solute pecks Cercopithecus or it does not peck rubel or both if there is something such that it is not a vitalist. sent8: if the solute does tunnel Light the trolleybus does not tunnel steeplejack. sent9: something is a kind of a collective or does not tunnel Light or both. sent10: the fact that the solute does not tunnel steeplejack and is a kind of an explorer is wrong if the trolleybus is not an explorer. sent11: the trolleybus does peck disturbance and does not tunnel steeplejack. sent12: something is not a kind of an ordeal if it does not peck rubel. sent13: something that is not an explorer is palingenetic and is prejudicial. sent14: The Light does tunnel trolleybus. sent15: the steeplejack does not tarry if that the trolleybus tunnels Light but it does not tarry is not true. sent16: that the herbal is not a vitalist is not false. sent17: if the trolleybus does not tunnel Light then that the solute is not a kind of an explorer and does tunnel Light is not correct. sent18: something is not an explorer if that it is palingenetic and it does not tunnel Light is false. sent19: if something is a collective and/or it does not tunnel Light then the rover does not tunnel Light. sent20: if that the solute does not tunnel steeplejack and is an explorer is not correct the herbal is not prejudicial.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trolleybus is not non-palingenetic but it does not tunnel Light.; assump1 -> int1: the trolleybus does not tunnel Light.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that that the trolleybus is palingenetic but it does not tunnel Light is right is false.; sent18 -> int4: if that the trolleybus is palingenetic and does not tunnel Light does not hold it is not an explorer.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the trolleybus is not a kind of an explorer.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that that the solute does not tunnel steeplejack but it is a kind of an explorer does not hold is not incorrect.; int6 & sent20 -> int7: the herbal is not prejudicial.; int7 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the steeplejack is prejudicial and does not tarry.
sent13 -> int8: if the steeplejack is not an explorer it is palingenetic and is prejudicial.; sent16 -> int9: something is not a vitalist.; int9 & sent7 -> int10: that the solute pecks Cercopithecus and/or does not peck rubel is not false.; sent5 -> int11: if the solute does peck Cercopithecus it is not an ordeal.; sent12 -> int12: if the solute does not peck rubel it is not an ordeal.; int10 & int11 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the solute is not an ordeal is not wrong.; sent3 & int13 -> int14: the steeplejack is not an explorer but it tunnels steeplejack.; int14 -> int15: the fact that the steeplejack is not a kind of an explorer is true.; int8 & int15 -> int16: the steeplejack is palingenetic and it is prejudicial.; int16 -> int17: the steeplejack is prejudicial.; sent9 & sent19 -> int18: the rover does not tunnel Light.; int18 -> int19: something does not tunnel Light.;
$hypothesis$ = that the steeplejack is prejudicial but it does not tarry is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the liftman does tunnel steeplejack. sent2: the fact that the steeplejack is prejudicial but it does not tarry is not correct if the herbal is not prejudicial. sent3: if the solute is not an ordeal then the steeplejack is not an explorer and does tunnel steeplejack. sent4: the solute does not tarry. sent5: something is not an ordeal if it pecks Cercopithecus. sent6: the trolleybus does tunnel Light. sent7: either the solute pecks Cercopithecus or it does not peck rubel or both if there is something such that it is not a vitalist. sent8: if the solute does tunnel Light the trolleybus does not tunnel steeplejack. sent9: something is a kind of a collective or does not tunnel Light or both. sent10: the fact that the solute does not tunnel steeplejack and is a kind of an explorer is wrong if the trolleybus is not an explorer. sent11: the trolleybus does peck disturbance and does not tunnel steeplejack. sent12: something is not a kind of an ordeal if it does not peck rubel. sent13: something that is not an explorer is palingenetic and is prejudicial. sent14: The Light does tunnel trolleybus. sent15: the steeplejack does not tarry if that the trolleybus tunnels Light but it does not tarry is not true. sent16: that the herbal is not a vitalist is not false. sent17: if the trolleybus does not tunnel Light then that the solute is not a kind of an explorer and does tunnel Light is not correct. sent18: something is not an explorer if that it is palingenetic and it does not tunnel Light is false. sent19: if something is a collective and/or it does not tunnel Light then the rover does not tunnel Light. sent20: if that the solute does not tunnel steeplejack and is an explorer is not correct the herbal is not prejudicial. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trolleybus is not non-palingenetic but it does not tunnel Light.; assump1 -> int1: the trolleybus does not tunnel Light.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that that the trolleybus is palingenetic but it does not tunnel Light is right is false.; sent18 -> int4: if that the trolleybus is palingenetic and does not tunnel Light does not hold it is not an explorer.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the trolleybus is not a kind of an explorer.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that that the solute does not tunnel steeplejack but it is a kind of an explorer does not hold is not incorrect.; int6 & sent20 -> int7: the herbal is not prejudicial.; int7 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__