the spouse is an antiseptic and it is a Urodella.
sent1: the DISA describes sandgrouse but it is not bisontine. sent2: if the haze does not describe retreatant then that the spouse does not describe retreatant and is associative does not hold. sent3: if the haze does not describe retreatant then the fact that the spouse does not describe retreatant and it is not associative does not hold. sent4: if that the haze is inheritable and is a argasid is not right then that it does not describe retreatant is not false. sent5: something is antiseptic if that it does not describe retreatant and is not associative is not true. sent6: there are mastoid things. sent7: that something is antiseptic thing that is a kind of a Urodella is not right if it does not cremate Cockcroft. sent8: if that the spouse does not cremate Cockcroft and it is not ropy is not correct then it does describe sandgrouse. sent9: the spouse is a Urodella and it is ropy if there exists something such that it is a kind of a mastoid. sent10: that the spouse does not describe retreatant but it is associative is wrong. sent11: the fact that the DISA describes sandgrouse but it is not bisontine is wrong if the haze does cremate Cockcroft.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the haze does cremate Cockcroft.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the DISA does describe sandgrouse but it is not bisontine is not right.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the haze does not cremate Cockcroft.; sent5 -> int4: if the fact that that the spouse does not describe retreatant and is not associative does not hold is right that it is an antiseptic is not wrong.; sent6 & sent9 -> int5: the spouse is a kind of a Urodella and it is ropy.; int5 -> int6: the spouse is a Urodella.;
that the spouse is a kind of an antiseptic and it is a kind of a Urodella is false.
sent7 -> int7: the fact that the spouse is an antiseptic and a Urodella is incorrect if it does not cremate Cockcroft.;
$hypothesis$ = the spouse is an antiseptic and it is a Urodella. ; $context$ = sent1: the DISA describes sandgrouse but it is not bisontine. sent2: if the haze does not describe retreatant then that the spouse does not describe retreatant and is associative does not hold. sent3: if the haze does not describe retreatant then the fact that the spouse does not describe retreatant and it is not associative does not hold. sent4: if that the haze is inheritable and is a argasid is not right then that it does not describe retreatant is not false. sent5: something is antiseptic if that it does not describe retreatant and is not associative is not true. sent6: there are mastoid things. sent7: that something is antiseptic thing that is a kind of a Urodella is not right if it does not cremate Cockcroft. sent8: if that the spouse does not cremate Cockcroft and it is not ropy is not correct then it does describe sandgrouse. sent9: the spouse is a Urodella and it is ropy if there exists something such that it is a kind of a mastoid. sent10: that the spouse does not describe retreatant but it is associative is wrong. sent11: the fact that the DISA describes sandgrouse but it is not bisontine is wrong if the haze does cremate Cockcroft. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the haze does cremate Cockcroft.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: that the DISA does describe sandgrouse but it is not bisontine is not right.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the haze does not cremate Cockcroft.; sent5 -> int4: if the fact that that the spouse does not describe retreatant and is not associative does not hold is right that it is an antiseptic is not wrong.; sent6 & sent9 -> int5: the spouse is a kind of a Urodella and it is ropy.; int5 -> int6: the spouse is a Urodella.; __UNKNOWN__