the rutile does not salve circumduction but it is biographic.
sent1: the biprism is biographic if the rutile defrays lumpenproletariat. sent2: the biprism is phlegmy. sent3: if the musketeer is a Eddington the rutile is biographic. sent4: the fact that the biprism is not a kind of a result and is intrasentential is not correct. sent5: the barbette hustles if the biprism does defray lumpenproletariat. sent6: the fact that the office-bearer salves rutile and is intrasentential is not true. sent7: the musketeer is not biographic if the fact that the rutile is both not nonpolitical and a lecithin is incorrect. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it does salve rutile and is intrasentential is not correct then the rutile is intrasentential. sent9: that the rutile does not salve circumduction and is biographic does not hold if it is a kind of a legislatorship. sent10: if the musketeer is a kind of a Eddington then the rutile does not salve circumduction but it is biographic. sent11: that the musketeer is a Eddington is true if the biprism clocks long-sufferance. sent12: the biprism is phlegmy and it defrays lumpenproletariat if it is not a kind of a legislatorship. sent13: the barbette does not hustle. sent14: if that the rutile is not a lecithin hold the fact that it is nonpolitical and it is not a Eddington is not right. sent15: that something is a kind of non-nonpolitical thing that is a lecithin is not right if it is not intrasentential. sent16: if that something is both nonpolitical and not a Eddington is not right that it does not clock long-sufferance is not wrong. sent17: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a legislatorship and does not clock long-sufferance is wrong the crossjack hustles. sent18: if the biprism is not a legislatorship then it is phlegmy. sent19: the rutile is biographic. sent20: if the barbette is a Eddington then the fact that the biprism is not a legislatorship and does not clock long-sufferance is false. sent21: the biprism does clock long-sufferance if it is a legislatorship.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the biprism is not a legislatorship.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the biprism is phlegmy and it does defray lumpenproletariat.; int1 -> int2: the biprism does defray lumpenproletariat.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: that the barbette does hustle hold.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the biprism is a legislatorship.; int5 & sent21 -> int6: the biprism clocks long-sufferance.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the musketeer is a kind of a Eddington.; int7 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the crossjack hustles.
sent15 -> int8: the fact that the rutile is not nonpolitical but it is a lecithin is not correct if it is not intrasentential.; sent6 -> int9: there is something such that that it salves rutile and it is intrasentential is incorrect.; int9 & sent8 -> int10: the rutile is not intrasentential.; int8 & int10 -> int11: that the rutile is non-nonpolitical thing that is a lecithin is not true.; sent7 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the musketeer is non-biographic is true.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that it is not biographic.;
$hypothesis$ = the rutile does not salve circumduction but it is biographic. ; $context$ = sent1: the biprism is biographic if the rutile defrays lumpenproletariat. sent2: the biprism is phlegmy. sent3: if the musketeer is a Eddington the rutile is biographic. sent4: the fact that the biprism is not a kind of a result and is intrasentential is not correct. sent5: the barbette hustles if the biprism does defray lumpenproletariat. sent6: the fact that the office-bearer salves rutile and is intrasentential is not true. sent7: the musketeer is not biographic if the fact that the rutile is both not nonpolitical and a lecithin is incorrect. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it does salve rutile and is intrasentential is not correct then the rutile is intrasentential. sent9: that the rutile does not salve circumduction and is biographic does not hold if it is a kind of a legislatorship. sent10: if the musketeer is a kind of a Eddington then the rutile does not salve circumduction but it is biographic. sent11: that the musketeer is a Eddington is true if the biprism clocks long-sufferance. sent12: the biprism is phlegmy and it defrays lumpenproletariat if it is not a kind of a legislatorship. sent13: the barbette does not hustle. sent14: if that the rutile is not a lecithin hold the fact that it is nonpolitical and it is not a Eddington is not right. sent15: that something is a kind of non-nonpolitical thing that is a lecithin is not right if it is not intrasentential. sent16: if that something is both nonpolitical and not a Eddington is not right that it does not clock long-sufferance is not wrong. sent17: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a legislatorship and does not clock long-sufferance is wrong the crossjack hustles. sent18: if the biprism is not a legislatorship then it is phlegmy. sent19: the rutile is biographic. sent20: if the barbette is a Eddington then the fact that the biprism is not a legislatorship and does not clock long-sufferance is false. sent21: the biprism does clock long-sufferance if it is a legislatorship. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the biprism is not a legislatorship.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the biprism is phlegmy and it does defray lumpenproletariat.; int1 -> int2: the biprism does defray lumpenproletariat.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: that the barbette does hustle hold.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the biprism is a legislatorship.; int5 & sent21 -> int6: the biprism clocks long-sufferance.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the musketeer is a kind of a Eddington.; int7 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__