that the chemosynthesis is not a grits and it does not utter Klansman is not correct.
sent1: something is not a culm if it does not utter scabbard. sent2: if the fact that the Klansman is not an oreo and/or is not immeasurable does not hold the Nut does not utter Klansman. sent3: there exists something such that it does utter chafe. sent4: if the fact that the indusium is a drugstore and is not a kind of an active does not hold that the keelboat is a culm is not false. sent5: if that something does utter scabbard and it is iconic does not hold then it does not utter scabbard. sent6: the fact that the chemosynthesis is not a grits and it does not utter Klansman is wrong if that the Nut does not utter Klansman is correct. sent7: something is an active. sent8: if the fact that the keelboat is an active and iconic is not true the fact that it is not active is correct. sent9: if the indusium is not iconic then that the Klansman is not a culm and does not utter scabbard is not right. sent10: the fact that the keelboat does utter scabbard and it is iconic does not hold if something utters chafe. sent11: the chemosynthesis is not a grits and does not utter Klansman if the Klansman is an active. sent12: if the Klansman is not an oreo and/or it is not immeasurable it is not a kind of a drugstore. sent13: if that something is not a culm and it does not utter scabbard is not true then it is a drugstore. sent14: that the Nut is not a volatile but it is iconic does not hold if the plodder is not a kind of a Mugilidae. sent15: if the Klansman is not a kind of a drugstore then that the indusium is both a drugstore and not active is false. sent16: the keelboat is iconic if the fact that the fact that the Nut is a kind of non-volatile thing that is iconic is not true is true.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Klansman is not an oreo and/or is not immeasurable.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the Klansman is not a drugstore.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the indusium is a drugstore that is not an active is wrong.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the keelboat is a kind of a culm.; sent1 -> int4: if the keelboat does not utter scabbard it is not a culm.; sent5 -> int5: if the fact that the keelboat utters scabbard and it is not non-iconic is not correct then it does not utters scabbard.; sent3 & sent10 -> int6: that the keelboat does utter scabbard and it is iconic is incorrect.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the keelboat does not utter scabbard.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the keelboat is not a kind of a culm.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: that the Klansman is not an oreo or it is not immeasurable or both does not hold.; int10 & sent2 -> int11: the Nut does not utter Klansman.; int11 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the chemosynthesis is not a grits and it does not utter Klansman.
sent13 -> int12: the fact that the Klansman is a drugstore is not wrong if the fact that it is not a kind of a culm and does not utter scabbard is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = that the chemosynthesis is not a grits and it does not utter Klansman is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a culm if it does not utter scabbard. sent2: if the fact that the Klansman is not an oreo and/or is not immeasurable does not hold the Nut does not utter Klansman. sent3: there exists something such that it does utter chafe. sent4: if the fact that the indusium is a drugstore and is not a kind of an active does not hold that the keelboat is a culm is not false. sent5: if that something does utter scabbard and it is iconic does not hold then it does not utter scabbard. sent6: the fact that the chemosynthesis is not a grits and it does not utter Klansman is wrong if that the Nut does not utter Klansman is correct. sent7: something is an active. sent8: if the fact that the keelboat is an active and iconic is not true the fact that it is not active is correct. sent9: if the indusium is not iconic then that the Klansman is not a culm and does not utter scabbard is not right. sent10: the fact that the keelboat does utter scabbard and it is iconic does not hold if something utters chafe. sent11: the chemosynthesis is not a grits and does not utter Klansman if the Klansman is an active. sent12: if the Klansman is not an oreo and/or it is not immeasurable it is not a kind of a drugstore. sent13: if that something is not a culm and it does not utter scabbard is not true then it is a drugstore. sent14: that the Nut is not a volatile but it is iconic does not hold if the plodder is not a kind of a Mugilidae. sent15: if the Klansman is not a kind of a drugstore then that the indusium is both a drugstore and not active is false. sent16: the keelboat is iconic if the fact that the fact that the Nut is a kind of non-volatile thing that is iconic is not true is true. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Klansman is not an oreo and/or is not immeasurable.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the Klansman is not a drugstore.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the indusium is a drugstore that is not an active is wrong.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the keelboat is a kind of a culm.; sent1 -> int4: if the keelboat does not utter scabbard it is not a culm.; sent5 -> int5: if the fact that the keelboat utters scabbard and it is not non-iconic is not correct then it does not utters scabbard.; sent3 & sent10 -> int6: that the keelboat does utter scabbard and it is iconic is incorrect.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the keelboat does not utter scabbard.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the keelboat is not a kind of a culm.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: that the Klansman is not an oreo or it is not immeasurable or both does not hold.; int10 & sent2 -> int11: the Nut does not utter Klansman.; int11 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__