the superstrate is not a centare.
sent1: there is something such that it does not provide. sent2: that the rooftop pities cachinnation and is a kind of a tarsal is false. sent3: something is non-amygdaline if that it is a cards and it is a tarsal does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the parlormaid is a centare is correct then the oxidase is a centare. sent5: the fact that something is a vivarium but it does not provide is not correct if it is not amygdaline. sent6: the parlormaid is not a vivarium but amygdaline if there is something such that it does not provide. sent7: the rooftop is a tarsal if there is something such that it is a kind of a centare and does card. sent8: the rooftop is not tarsal if the fact that it does pity cachinnation and it is a tarsal does not hold. sent9: if the superstrate is tarsal then either it is not amygdaline or it is a cards or both. sent10: there exists something such that it is symptomatic and it does not unpack. sent11: the superstrate cards if the parlormaid is not a vivarium but it is amygdaline.
sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the parlormaid is not a vivarium but amygdaline.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the superstrate is a cards.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the superstrate is a kind of a centare.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: the superstrate is a kind of a centare and it is a cards.; int3 -> int4: that something is a centare and it does card is not false.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the rooftop is a kind of a tarsal.; sent8 & sent2 -> int6: the rooftop is not a tarsal.; int5 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the oxidase is a centare.
$hypothesis$ = the superstrate is not a centare. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it does not provide. sent2: that the rooftop pities cachinnation and is a kind of a tarsal is false. sent3: something is non-amygdaline if that it is a cards and it is a tarsal does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the parlormaid is a centare is correct then the oxidase is a centare. sent5: the fact that something is a vivarium but it does not provide is not correct if it is not amygdaline. sent6: the parlormaid is not a vivarium but amygdaline if there is something such that it does not provide. sent7: the rooftop is a tarsal if there is something such that it is a kind of a centare and does card. sent8: the rooftop is not tarsal if the fact that it does pity cachinnation and it is a tarsal does not hold. sent9: if the superstrate is tarsal then either it is not amygdaline or it is a cards or both. sent10: there exists something such that it is symptomatic and it does not unpack. sent11: the superstrate cards if the parlormaid is not a vivarium but it is amygdaline. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the parlormaid is not a vivarium but amygdaline.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the superstrate is a cards.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the superstrate is a kind of a centare.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: the superstrate is a kind of a centare and it is a cards.; int3 -> int4: that something is a centare and it does card is not false.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the rooftop is a kind of a tarsal.; sent8 & sent2 -> int6: the rooftop is not a tarsal.; int5 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__