the geologist is not disjunct if the bore is a triviality.
sent1: that something is not azotic but it is a kind of a stamen is true if it is not a nepotism. sent2: if the bore is a triviality and does nod catananche then the geologist is not disjunct. sent3: the bore does not nod catananche if the geologist is a kind of a triviality and it is disjunct. sent4: the bore nods catananche. sent5: the hymen is a triviality. sent6: if something is both not azotic and a stamen then it does not nod rebuttal. sent7: if the bore is a triviality and it does nod catananche the geologist is disjunct. sent8: the fact that something is not disjunct is right if the fact that it is disjunct and it is not Monacan is wrong. sent9: something is a triviality and nods catananche if it is not disjunct. sent10: the fact that the fact that the chipotle is not non-disjunct but non-Monacan hold is not true if something does not nod rebuttal. sent11: the geologist is disjunct. sent12: the bore is disjunct if the geologist is a triviality. sent13: The catananche nods bore. sent14: everything is not a nepotism.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bore is a triviality.; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: the bore is a triviality and nods catananche.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: that the geologist is not disjunct is not wrong.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;
the chipotle is a triviality.
sent8 -> int3: the chipotle is not disjunct if that it is not disjunct and it is not Monacan is not true.; sent1 -> int4: the geologist is not azotic but it is a kind of a stamen if it is not a nepotism.; sent14 -> int5: the geologist is not a nepotism.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the geologist is a kind of non-azotic thing that is a kind of a stamen.; int6 -> int7: everything is not azotic but a stamen.; int7 -> int8: the bore is not azotic and is a kind of a stamen.; sent6 -> int9: the bore does not nod rebuttal if it is both not azotic and a stamen.; int8 & int9 -> int10: that the bore does not nod rebuttal is not incorrect.; int10 -> int11: that there exists something such that it does not nod rebuttal is not wrong.; int11 & sent10 -> int12: the fact that the chipotle is disjunct thing that is not Monacan is false.; int3 & int12 -> int13: the chipotle is not disjunct.; sent9 -> int14: the fact that the chipotle is a triviality and it nods catananche is not false if it is not disjunct.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the chipotle is a triviality and it does nod catananche.; int15 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the geologist is not disjunct if the bore is a triviality. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is not azotic but it is a kind of a stamen is true if it is not a nepotism. sent2: if the bore is a triviality and does nod catananche then the geologist is not disjunct. sent3: the bore does not nod catananche if the geologist is a kind of a triviality and it is disjunct. sent4: the bore nods catananche. sent5: the hymen is a triviality. sent6: if something is both not azotic and a stamen then it does not nod rebuttal. sent7: if the bore is a triviality and it does nod catananche the geologist is disjunct. sent8: the fact that something is not disjunct is right if the fact that it is disjunct and it is not Monacan is wrong. sent9: something is a triviality and nods catananche if it is not disjunct. sent10: the fact that the fact that the chipotle is not non-disjunct but non-Monacan hold is not true if something does not nod rebuttal. sent11: the geologist is disjunct. sent12: the bore is disjunct if the geologist is a triviality. sent13: The catananche nods bore. sent14: everything is not a nepotism. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bore is a triviality.; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: the bore is a triviality and nods catananche.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: that the geologist is not disjunct is not wrong.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__