that the scapegrace is a scorer and/or effuses is correct.
sent1: the scapegrace is a e-commerce. sent2: the quay is androgenetic but it does not enliven damned. sent3: the scapegrace is a kind of an organic if that the osteocyte is not a corruptibility and furrows quay hold. sent4: if something is not a kind of a demonstrative then the fact that it does not enliven damned and is a muscleman is not true. sent5: that the quay is not demonstrative hold. sent6: the scapegrace effuses if the fact that it does not enliven damned and is a muscleman is wrong. sent7: the osteocyte is not a kind of a corruptibility and does furrow quay. sent8: that something is a kind of a scorer but it is not a e-commerce is not right if it is androgenetic. sent9: the fact that the scapegrace does enliven damned and is a muscleman does not hold. sent10: the scapegrace is not androgenetic. sent11: the scapegrace is not a kind of a demonstrative if it is a stepmother and it is a kind of an organic. sent12: if the quay is a kind of an organic it is a stepmother. sent13: if the fact that the scapegrace is not a kind of a e-commerce and it is non-androgenetic is not true then it is a kind of a stepmother. sent14: the osteocyte is not a corruptibility. sent15: the miss is not a scorer if there is something such that the fact that it is a scorer and is not a kind of a e-commerce does not hold. sent16: a non-demonstrative thing is a kind of an organic. sent17: the fact that something does enliven damned and it is a muscleman is not right if it is not a kind of a demonstrative. sent18: if the osteocyte is a corruptibility and it does furrow quay the scapegrace is an organic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scapegrace is not a e-commerce and is not androgenetic.; assump1 -> int1: the scapegrace is not a e-commerce.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the scapegrace is not a e-commerce and is not androgenetic is not true.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the scapegrace is a stepmother.; sent3 & sent7 -> int5: the scapegrace is a kind of an organic.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the scapegrace is both a stepmother and organic.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the scapegrace is not a demonstrative.; sent4 -> int8: if the scapegrace is not demonstrative that it does not enliven damned and it is a muscleman is incorrect.; int7 & int8 -> int9: that the scapegrace does not enliven damned but it is a muscleman is incorrect.; int9 & sent6 -> int10: the scapegrace effuses.; int10 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the scapegrace is a kind of a scorer or does effuse or both is wrong.
sent16 -> int11: if the quay is not a demonstrative then it is an organic.; int11 & sent5 -> int12: the quay is not inorganic.; sent12 & int12 -> int13: the quay is a stepmother.; sent2 -> int14: the quay is androgenetic.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the quay is both a stepmother and androgenetic.; int15 -> int16: something is a stepmother and androgenetic.;
$hypothesis$ = that the scapegrace is a scorer and/or effuses is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the scapegrace is a e-commerce. sent2: the quay is androgenetic but it does not enliven damned. sent3: the scapegrace is a kind of an organic if that the osteocyte is not a corruptibility and furrows quay hold. sent4: if something is not a kind of a demonstrative then the fact that it does not enliven damned and is a muscleman is not true. sent5: that the quay is not demonstrative hold. sent6: the scapegrace effuses if the fact that it does not enliven damned and is a muscleman is wrong. sent7: the osteocyte is not a kind of a corruptibility and does furrow quay. sent8: that something is a kind of a scorer but it is not a e-commerce is not right if it is androgenetic. sent9: the fact that the scapegrace does enliven damned and is a muscleman does not hold. sent10: the scapegrace is not androgenetic. sent11: the scapegrace is not a kind of a demonstrative if it is a stepmother and it is a kind of an organic. sent12: if the quay is a kind of an organic it is a stepmother. sent13: if the fact that the scapegrace is not a kind of a e-commerce and it is non-androgenetic is not true then it is a kind of a stepmother. sent14: the osteocyte is not a corruptibility. sent15: the miss is not a scorer if there is something such that the fact that it is a scorer and is not a kind of a e-commerce does not hold. sent16: a non-demonstrative thing is a kind of an organic. sent17: the fact that something does enliven damned and it is a muscleman is not right if it is not a kind of a demonstrative. sent18: if the osteocyte is a corruptibility and it does furrow quay the scapegrace is an organic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scapegrace is not a e-commerce and is not androgenetic.; assump1 -> int1: the scapegrace is not a e-commerce.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the scapegrace is not a e-commerce and is not androgenetic is not true.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the scapegrace is a stepmother.; sent3 & sent7 -> int5: the scapegrace is a kind of an organic.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the scapegrace is both a stepmother and organic.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the scapegrace is not a demonstrative.; sent4 -> int8: if the scapegrace is not demonstrative that it does not enliven damned and it is a muscleman is incorrect.; int7 & int8 -> int9: that the scapegrace does not enliven damned but it is a muscleman is incorrect.; int9 & sent6 -> int10: the scapegrace effuses.; int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__