that the armrest is not a kind of an immortal but it erases briefing is incorrect.
sent1: the convalescent is not brisant if the gerontologist does edge industry but it is not a manifest. sent2: if the dichroism is not a SVR and does not bethink humor then the cannery is not capacitive. sent3: that something blackmails mildew and does disharmonize is not right if the fact that it is not brisant is not incorrect. sent4: the convalescent is brisant. sent5: if the cannery does not disharmonize then the dichroism is both adjectival and capacitive. sent6: if that the dichroism is not a kind of a SVR and does not bethink humor is not right the gerontologist is not adjectival. sent7: the fact that the convalescent is capacitive and does not disharmonize hold if the cannery is not capacitive. sent8: the cowpie is not aroid. sent9: that the armrest is a kind of non-immortal thing that erases briefing is false if the gerontologist is not an immortal. sent10: the fact that something is capacitive and does not disharmonize is false if it is brisant. sent11: if the cowpie is not aroid it does chuckle and/or is a quack. sent12: the fact that the gerontologist does edge industry and does not manifest is not incorrect if the annihilator does quack. sent13: the annihilator is a kind of a quack if the cowpie chuckles.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the dichroism is not a SVR and it does not bethink humor is correct.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the cannery is not capacitive.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the convalescent is capacitive but it does not disharmonize.; sent10 -> int3: that the convalescent is capacitive but it does not disharmonize does not hold if it is brisant.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: that the convalescent is capacitive but it does not disharmonize is not correct.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the dichroism is not a SVR and does not bethink humor is false.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: that the gerontologist is non-adjectival hold.;
the armrest is not an immortal and erases briefing.
sent3 -> int8: the fact that the convalescent blackmails mildew and it disharmonizes is incorrect if it is not brisant.; sent11 & sent8 -> int9: the cowpie does chuckle or it is a quack or both.;
$hypothesis$ = that the armrest is not a kind of an immortal but it erases briefing is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the convalescent is not brisant if the gerontologist does edge industry but it is not a manifest. sent2: if the dichroism is not a SVR and does not bethink humor then the cannery is not capacitive. sent3: that something blackmails mildew and does disharmonize is not right if the fact that it is not brisant is not incorrect. sent4: the convalescent is brisant. sent5: if the cannery does not disharmonize then the dichroism is both adjectival and capacitive. sent6: if that the dichroism is not a kind of a SVR and does not bethink humor is not right the gerontologist is not adjectival. sent7: the fact that the convalescent is capacitive and does not disharmonize hold if the cannery is not capacitive. sent8: the cowpie is not aroid. sent9: that the armrest is a kind of non-immortal thing that erases briefing is false if the gerontologist is not an immortal. sent10: the fact that something is capacitive and does not disharmonize is false if it is brisant. sent11: if the cowpie is not aroid it does chuckle and/or is a quack. sent12: the fact that the gerontologist does edge industry and does not manifest is not incorrect if the annihilator does quack. sent13: the annihilator is a kind of a quack if the cowpie chuckles. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the dichroism is not a SVR and it does not bethink humor is correct.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the cannery is not capacitive.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the convalescent is capacitive but it does not disharmonize.; sent10 -> int3: that the convalescent is capacitive but it does not disharmonize does not hold if it is brisant.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: that the convalescent is capacitive but it does not disharmonize is not correct.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the dichroism is not a SVR and does not bethink humor is false.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: that the gerontologist is non-adjectival hold.; __UNKNOWN__