if the voyeurism is blue-collar then the leadplant is not tongueless and is not a kind of a Luba.
sent1: something is a Luba. sent2: the grad is blue-collar. sent3: there is something such that it does mummify grad. sent4: if there exists something such that either it is a Luba or it is tongueless or both the leadplant is not a fescue. sent5: the voyeurism is not blue-collar and it is not a Luba if the fact that the leadplant is a fescue is not incorrect. sent6: there is something such that it damps Enesco and it is extrasystolic. sent7: if something is blue-collar then the voyeurism is not tongueless. sent8: something is Wittgensteinian but it is not a kind of a Arhus. sent9: the voyeurism is not a fescue if something that is a kind of a Luba is non-blue-collar. sent10: if the leadplant is blue-collar the voyeurism is not a fescue and is not tongueless. sent11: if there exists something such that it is Wittgensteinian and it is not a Arhus the leadplant is not a Luba. sent12: that something is blue-collar but it is not a Luba is not false. sent13: that the voyeurism is not tongueless is correct. sent14: the voyeurism is not blue-collar if there exists something such that it is tongueless or it is a kind of a fescue or both. sent15: the leadplant is blue-collar.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the leadplant is not non-tongueless.; assump2 -> int1: the leadplant is tongueless and/or it is a fescue.; int1 -> int2: something is tongueless and/or is a fescue.; int2 & sent14 -> int3: the voyeurism is not blue-collar.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the voyeurism is blue-collar.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the leadplant is not tongueless.; sent8 & sent11 -> int6: the leadplant is not a Luba.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the leadplant is not tongueless and it is not a Luba.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if the voyeurism is blue-collar then the leadplant is not tongueless and is not a kind of a Luba. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a Luba. sent2: the grad is blue-collar. sent3: there is something such that it does mummify grad. sent4: if there exists something such that either it is a Luba or it is tongueless or both the leadplant is not a fescue. sent5: the voyeurism is not blue-collar and it is not a Luba if the fact that the leadplant is a fescue is not incorrect. sent6: there is something such that it damps Enesco and it is extrasystolic. sent7: if something is blue-collar then the voyeurism is not tongueless. sent8: something is Wittgensteinian but it is not a kind of a Arhus. sent9: the voyeurism is not a fescue if something that is a kind of a Luba is non-blue-collar. sent10: if the leadplant is blue-collar the voyeurism is not a fescue and is not tongueless. sent11: if there exists something such that it is Wittgensteinian and it is not a Arhus the leadplant is not a Luba. sent12: that something is blue-collar but it is not a Luba is not false. sent13: that the voyeurism is not tongueless is correct. sent14: the voyeurism is not blue-collar if there exists something such that it is tongueless or it is a kind of a fescue or both. sent15: the leadplant is blue-collar. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the leadplant is not non-tongueless.; assump2 -> int1: the leadplant is tongueless and/or it is a fescue.; int1 -> int2: something is tongueless and/or is a fescue.; int2 & sent14 -> int3: the voyeurism is not blue-collar.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the voyeurism is blue-collar.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the leadplant is not tongueless.; sent8 & sent11 -> int6: the leadplant is not a Luba.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the leadplant is not tongueless and it is not a Luba.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__