the kitul does not preoccupy aggro.
sent1: something is homiletics if it is a kind of a Schlumbergera. sent2: there exists something such that that it is a hirsuteness and it is a kind of a rearward does not hold. sent3: if that that the hydroelectricity is not a worthy but it is a Schlumbergera is correct does not hold it does not mark fomite. sent4: the fomite is not a kind of a rearward if it does rate. sent5: the hydroelectricity is not a kind of a rearward if there is something such that that it is a hirsuteness and it is a rearward does not hold. sent6: the kitul does preoccupy aggro if something is homiletics and is not a rearward. sent7: the hydroelectricity marks fomite and it does rate.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the hydroelectricity is a kind of non-worthy a Schlumbergera is incorrect.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the hydroelectricity does not mark fomite.; sent7 -> int2: the hydroelectricity marks fomite.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the hydroelectricity is not a kind of a worthy but it is a Schlumbergera.; int4 -> int5: the hydroelectricity is a Schlumbergera.; sent1 -> int6: if the hydroelectricity is a Schlumbergera then it is homiletics.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the hydroelectricity is homiletics is correct.; sent2 & sent5 -> int8: the hydroelectricity is not a rearward.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the hydroelectricity is homiletics and is not a rearward is correct.; int9 -> int10: the fact that something is homiletics and is not a rearward is true.; int10 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the kitul does not preoccupy aggro.
$hypothesis$ = the kitul does not preoccupy aggro. ; $context$ = sent1: something is homiletics if it is a kind of a Schlumbergera. sent2: there exists something such that that it is a hirsuteness and it is a kind of a rearward does not hold. sent3: if that that the hydroelectricity is not a worthy but it is a Schlumbergera is correct does not hold it does not mark fomite. sent4: the fomite is not a kind of a rearward if it does rate. sent5: the hydroelectricity is not a kind of a rearward if there is something such that that it is a hirsuteness and it is a rearward does not hold. sent6: the kitul does preoccupy aggro if something is homiletics and is not a rearward. sent7: the hydroelectricity marks fomite and it does rate. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the hydroelectricity is a kind of non-worthy a Schlumbergera is incorrect.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the hydroelectricity does not mark fomite.; sent7 -> int2: the hydroelectricity marks fomite.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the hydroelectricity is not a kind of a worthy but it is a Schlumbergera.; int4 -> int5: the hydroelectricity is a Schlumbergera.; sent1 -> int6: if the hydroelectricity is a Schlumbergera then it is homiletics.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the hydroelectricity is homiletics is correct.; sent2 & sent5 -> int8: the hydroelectricity is not a rearward.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the hydroelectricity is homiletics and is not a rearward is correct.; int9 -> int10: the fact that something is homiletics and is not a rearward is true.; int10 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__