the buckskin is not a heterogeneity and not a lava.
sent1: there is something such that it does not tusk millionairess. sent2: if the fact that the aplite is not a kind of a liaison or it is not a SCPO or both is incorrect then the fact that the buckskin is a gimlet hold. sent3: if something is a kind of a SCPO that is not a liaison it is not a kind of a gimlet. sent4: if something is not a kind of a heterogeneity then the fact that it is a kind of non-eparchial a lava is not true. sent5: the rivet is a SCPO but it is not a liaison if there exists something such that it does not tusk millionairess. sent6: the rivet is a SCPO if there is something such that it does not tusk millionairess. sent7: that something is not a kind of a heterogeneity and it is not a lava is not correct if it is a gimlet. sent8: that either something is not a liaison or it is not a SCPO or both does not hold if it does not tusk millionairess. sent9: the fact that the aplite does not tusk aplite and does Simonize thaumatolatry does not hold if it is a kind of a heterogeneity. sent10: the glume does not tusk Setubal. sent11: if there is something such that it does not enthuse the undercarriage is not bicapsular. sent12: if the sporophyte is a monochrome then the rivet is a monochrome. sent13: the rivet is a kind of a gimlet if that the aplite does not tusk aplite but it Simonizes thaumatolatry is false. sent14: that the rivet tusks millionairess and does not open hang-up does not hold if it is a monochrome. sent15: if the aplite tusks millionairess it is a SCPO. sent16: the glume does canter but it is not a allotropy if it does not tusk Setubal. sent17: the buckskin is not a heterogeneity and it is not a lava if the aplite is not a heterogeneity. sent18: if there exists something such that it is not bicapsular then the fact that the elixir is a kind of Tyrolean thing that does not congee is false. sent19: if the glume is a canter but it is not a allotropy then the bookseller does not enthuse. sent20: if there is something such that the fact that it is a Tyrolean and it is not a kind of a congee does not hold the sporophyte is a monochrome.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the aplite is a kind of a heterogeneity.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the aplite does not tusk aplite and does Simonize thaumatolatry is wrong.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the rivet is a gimlet.; sent3 -> int3: if the rivet is a SCPO but it is not a liaison it is not a kind of a gimlet.; sent1 & sent5 -> int4: the rivet is a SCPO but it is not a liaison.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the rivet is not a gimlet.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the aplite is not a heterogeneity.; int7 & sent17 -> hypothesis;
that the decline is not eparchial and is a kind of a lava is not true.
sent4 -> int8: if the decline is not a heterogeneity the fact that it is a kind of non-eparchial thing that is a kind of a lava is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the buckskin is not a heterogeneity and not a lava. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it does not tusk millionairess. sent2: if the fact that the aplite is not a kind of a liaison or it is not a SCPO or both is incorrect then the fact that the buckskin is a gimlet hold. sent3: if something is a kind of a SCPO that is not a liaison it is not a kind of a gimlet. sent4: if something is not a kind of a heterogeneity then the fact that it is a kind of non-eparchial a lava is not true. sent5: the rivet is a SCPO but it is not a liaison if there exists something such that it does not tusk millionairess. sent6: the rivet is a SCPO if there is something such that it does not tusk millionairess. sent7: that something is not a kind of a heterogeneity and it is not a lava is not correct if it is a gimlet. sent8: that either something is not a liaison or it is not a SCPO or both does not hold if it does not tusk millionairess. sent9: the fact that the aplite does not tusk aplite and does Simonize thaumatolatry does not hold if it is a kind of a heterogeneity. sent10: the glume does not tusk Setubal. sent11: if there is something such that it does not enthuse the undercarriage is not bicapsular. sent12: if the sporophyte is a monochrome then the rivet is a monochrome. sent13: the rivet is a kind of a gimlet if that the aplite does not tusk aplite but it Simonizes thaumatolatry is false. sent14: that the rivet tusks millionairess and does not open hang-up does not hold if it is a monochrome. sent15: if the aplite tusks millionairess it is a SCPO. sent16: the glume does canter but it is not a allotropy if it does not tusk Setubal. sent17: the buckskin is not a heterogeneity and it is not a lava if the aplite is not a heterogeneity. sent18: if there exists something such that it is not bicapsular then the fact that the elixir is a kind of Tyrolean thing that does not congee is false. sent19: if the glume is a canter but it is not a allotropy then the bookseller does not enthuse. sent20: if there is something such that the fact that it is a Tyrolean and it is not a kind of a congee does not hold the sporophyte is a monochrome. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the aplite is a kind of a heterogeneity.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the aplite does not tusk aplite and does Simonize thaumatolatry is wrong.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the rivet is a gimlet.; sent3 -> int3: if the rivet is a SCPO but it is not a liaison it is not a kind of a gimlet.; sent1 & sent5 -> int4: the rivet is a SCPO but it is not a liaison.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the rivet is not a gimlet.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the aplite is not a heterogeneity.; int7 & sent17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__