the fact that the abelia does not blackmail trough is not wrong.
sent1: the olivine does narrate and it is a diarist if the fact that the shopping does not narrate is not wrong. sent2: that the olivine is not Hebridean is not incorrect if the fennel is a prepuberty. sent3: that either the kalumpang does not edge Pujunan or it does tincture or both does not hold. sent4: if something is a filly it does not blackmail trough. sent5: if that the kalumpang either does not edge Pujunan or tinctures or both is incorrect that the fennel is not a prepuberty is false. sent6: if the shopping narrates it blackmails trough. sent7: the abelia is a filly if the olivine narrates. sent8: the olivine is a kind of a diarist. sent9: the trader is nautical thing that does blackmail capitation. sent10: if the shopping narrates the avocado does not blackmail capitation. sent11: if the avocado is a filly the shopping blackmails capitation. sent12: if the avocado is Hebridean then it does blackmail capitation. sent13: that the shopping blackmails capitation is not incorrect. sent14: the avocado narrates. sent15: the avocado is Hebridean. sent16: the olivine is a kind of a diarist if that the shopping does not narrate hold. sent17: the avocado narrates if the olivine does not blackmail capitation.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shopping does narrate.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the avocado does not blackmail capitation.; sent12 & sent15 -> int2: the avocado does blackmail capitation.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the shopping does not narrate.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the olivine narrates and it is a diarist.; int5 -> int6: the olivine does narrate.; int6 & sent7 -> int7: the abelia is a filly.; sent4 -> int8: if the abelia is a filly then it does not blackmail trough.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis;
the abelia blackmails trough.
sent5 & sent3 -> int9: the fennel is a kind of a prepuberty.; sent2 & int9 -> int10: the olivine is not Hebridean.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that the fact that it is not Hebridean is true.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the abelia does not blackmail trough is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the olivine does narrate and it is a diarist if the fact that the shopping does not narrate is not wrong. sent2: that the olivine is not Hebridean is not incorrect if the fennel is a prepuberty. sent3: that either the kalumpang does not edge Pujunan or it does tincture or both does not hold. sent4: if something is a filly it does not blackmail trough. sent5: if that the kalumpang either does not edge Pujunan or tinctures or both is incorrect that the fennel is not a prepuberty is false. sent6: if the shopping narrates it blackmails trough. sent7: the abelia is a filly if the olivine narrates. sent8: the olivine is a kind of a diarist. sent9: the trader is nautical thing that does blackmail capitation. sent10: if the shopping narrates the avocado does not blackmail capitation. sent11: if the avocado is a filly the shopping blackmails capitation. sent12: if the avocado is Hebridean then it does blackmail capitation. sent13: that the shopping blackmails capitation is not incorrect. sent14: the avocado narrates. sent15: the avocado is Hebridean. sent16: the olivine is a kind of a diarist if that the shopping does not narrate hold. sent17: the avocado narrates if the olivine does not blackmail capitation. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shopping does narrate.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the avocado does not blackmail capitation.; sent12 & sent15 -> int2: the avocado does blackmail capitation.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the shopping does not narrate.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the olivine narrates and it is a diarist.; int5 -> int6: the olivine does narrate.; int6 & sent7 -> int7: the abelia is a filly.; sent4 -> int8: if the abelia is a filly then it does not blackmail trough.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__