if the resorcinol husks then that the colicroot does punish greenishness but it is not nautical is not true.
sent1: the cosigner is graphic. sent2: the colicroot does punish greenishness but it is not nautical if the resorcinol does husk. sent3: that the resorcinol husks but it does not punish synod is false if the cosigner is nautical. sent4: the cosigner punishes greenishness if the colicroot punishes synod. sent5: if the resorcinol is nautical then the fact that the colicroot husks but it does not punish greenishness is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the colicroot punishes greenishness and it is nautical is false. sent7: the cosigner does punish synod if the resorcinol is a husk. sent8: if the fact that the resorcinol does punish synod is not wrong the cosigner punishes greenishness and is not a husk. sent9: the cosigner is a husk. sent10: the implantation does punish greenishness. sent11: the colicroot does hue resorcinol. sent12: the fact that the colicroot punishes greenishness but it is not nautical does not hold if the cosigner does punish synod. sent13: if the resorcinol does punish greenishness then the colicroot is nautical but it is not a kind of a husk. sent14: the colicroot husks. sent15: if the fact that the resorcinol either is not a husk or does punish synod or both is false the cosigner punishes greenishness. sent16: the fact that the resorcinol is not non-nautical and not a husk is wrong if the colicroot does punish greenishness.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the resorcinol does husk.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the cosigner does punish synod.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: that the colicroot does punish greenishness but it is not nautical is incorrect.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;
the cosigner punishes greenishness.
$hypothesis$ = if the resorcinol husks then that the colicroot does punish greenishness but it is not nautical is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the cosigner is graphic. sent2: the colicroot does punish greenishness but it is not nautical if the resorcinol does husk. sent3: that the resorcinol husks but it does not punish synod is false if the cosigner is nautical. sent4: the cosigner punishes greenishness if the colicroot punishes synod. sent5: if the resorcinol is nautical then the fact that the colicroot husks but it does not punish greenishness is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the colicroot punishes greenishness and it is nautical is false. sent7: the cosigner does punish synod if the resorcinol is a husk. sent8: if the fact that the resorcinol does punish synod is not wrong the cosigner punishes greenishness and is not a husk. sent9: the cosigner is a husk. sent10: the implantation does punish greenishness. sent11: the colicroot does hue resorcinol. sent12: the fact that the colicroot punishes greenishness but it is not nautical does not hold if the cosigner does punish synod. sent13: if the resorcinol does punish greenishness then the colicroot is nautical but it is not a kind of a husk. sent14: the colicroot husks. sent15: if the fact that the resorcinol either is not a husk or does punish synod or both is false the cosigner punishes greenishness. sent16: the fact that the resorcinol is not non-nautical and not a husk is wrong if the colicroot does punish greenishness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the resorcinol does husk.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the cosigner does punish synod.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: that the colicroot does punish greenishness but it is not nautical is incorrect.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__