the welwitschia is not a prompt.
sent1: if that the cocklebur is a kind of a Rosicrucian and it overwhelms aspartame is incorrect then it is not a mods. sent2: the binder brakes and is a kind of a marriageability. sent3: that the anticholinergic is a mods and is a brakes does not hold if it is not a kind of a parang. sent4: if the binder is a kind of non-romaic thing that discards Etropus the sunroof is not a kind of a marriageability. sent5: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a marriageability then the anticholinergic is romaic or does discard Etropus or both. sent6: the cocklebur is a kind of a mods that is a brakes. sent7: if the anticholinergic is romaic then the cocklebur is not a kind of a parang. sent8: the binder is not romaic but it does discard Etropus if there is something such that it is a parang. sent9: that the cocklebur is not the mods if the cocklebur does not overwhelm aspartame is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the welwitschia is not a prompt is right if the sunroof is not a marriageability. sent11: the fact that if the cocklebur does not exacerbate anorexia then that the cocklebur is a Rosicrucian and it does overwhelm aspartame is not correct hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cocklebur does not exacerbate anorexia.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the cocklebur is a kind of Rosicrucian thing that overwhelms aspartame is not correct.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the cocklebur is not a mods.; sent6 -> int3: the fact that the cocklebur is a mods is not false.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the cocklebur does exacerbate anorexia.;
the welwitschia does prompt.
sent2 -> int6: the binder is a marriageability.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is a marriageability.; int7 & sent5 -> int8: the anticholinergic is romaic and/or it discards Etropus.;
$hypothesis$ = the welwitschia is not a prompt. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the cocklebur is a kind of a Rosicrucian and it overwhelms aspartame is incorrect then it is not a mods. sent2: the binder brakes and is a kind of a marriageability. sent3: that the anticholinergic is a mods and is a brakes does not hold if it is not a kind of a parang. sent4: if the binder is a kind of non-romaic thing that discards Etropus the sunroof is not a kind of a marriageability. sent5: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a marriageability then the anticholinergic is romaic or does discard Etropus or both. sent6: the cocklebur is a kind of a mods that is a brakes. sent7: if the anticholinergic is romaic then the cocklebur is not a kind of a parang. sent8: the binder is not romaic but it does discard Etropus if there is something such that it is a parang. sent9: that the cocklebur is not the mods if the cocklebur does not overwhelm aspartame is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the welwitschia is not a prompt is right if the sunroof is not a marriageability. sent11: the fact that if the cocklebur does not exacerbate anorexia then that the cocklebur is a Rosicrucian and it does overwhelm aspartame is not correct hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cocklebur does not exacerbate anorexia.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the cocklebur is a kind of Rosicrucian thing that overwhelms aspartame is not correct.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the cocklebur is not a mods.; sent6 -> int3: the fact that the cocklebur is a mods is not false.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the cocklebur does exacerbate anorexia.; __UNKNOWN__