the fact that the causeway does not coo knowingness does not hold.
sent1: the fire-on-the-mountain does not immortalize unaffectedness and it does not immortalize villeinage if it is not a kind of a roentgenogram. sent2: the pen is not a stonewaller if the causeway is a kind of non-merciless a deacon. sent3: the rough is a kind of a subcontractor. sent4: if there is something such that it is peninsular but not a subcontractor the causeway does coo knowingness. sent5: the pendragon is not non-skinny. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of peninsular a subcontractor. sent7: there is something such that the fact that it is quantal and it is an automatic is not correct. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it is quantal and an automatic does not hold the fire-on-the-mountain is not a roentgenogram. sent9: the pen pitchforks. sent10: the endoscope is not non-peninsular and not a subcontractor. sent11: if the pendragon is skinny it is a evolutionism. sent12: if that the fact that something is both not a stonewaller and a pitchfork is true is wrong then it does not coo knowingness. sent13: if something does not immortalize unaffectedness and it does not immortalize villeinage the pendragon is not merciless. sent14: something is not merciless but it is a deacon if it is not a kind of a evolutionism. sent15: the causeway is a subcontractor. sent16: something that does not coo knowingness is a subcontractor that is not a galvanism. sent17: there is something such that it is an automatic.
sent10 -> int1: something is peninsular and not a subcontractor.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the pen is a subcontractor but not a galvanism.
sent16 -> int2: if the pen does not coo knowingness then it is a subcontractor and it is not a galvanism.; sent14 -> int3: if the causeway is not a evolutionism it is not merciless and it is a kind of a deacon.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the causeway does not coo knowingness does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fire-on-the-mountain does not immortalize unaffectedness and it does not immortalize villeinage if it is not a kind of a roentgenogram. sent2: the pen is not a stonewaller if the causeway is a kind of non-merciless a deacon. sent3: the rough is a kind of a subcontractor. sent4: if there is something such that it is peninsular but not a subcontractor the causeway does coo knowingness. sent5: the pendragon is not non-skinny. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of peninsular a subcontractor. sent7: there is something such that the fact that it is quantal and it is an automatic is not correct. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it is quantal and an automatic does not hold the fire-on-the-mountain is not a roentgenogram. sent9: the pen pitchforks. sent10: the endoscope is not non-peninsular and not a subcontractor. sent11: if the pendragon is skinny it is a evolutionism. sent12: if that the fact that something is both not a stonewaller and a pitchfork is true is wrong then it does not coo knowingness. sent13: if something does not immortalize unaffectedness and it does not immortalize villeinage the pendragon is not merciless. sent14: something is not merciless but it is a deacon if it is not a kind of a evolutionism. sent15: the causeway is a subcontractor. sent16: something that does not coo knowingness is a subcontractor that is not a galvanism. sent17: there is something such that it is an automatic. ; $proof$ = 
sent10 -> int1: something is peninsular and not a subcontractor.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__