the Luger does dissociate.
sent1: the robin is spectral if that it dissociates does not hold. sent2: the robin is not inadvisable if the alternator is holy and is not inadvisable. sent3: the fact that something is not apopemptic but it is a Spinoza does not hold if it does bonnet Azerbaijan. sent4: if something is a kind of a Spinoza it is not spectral. sent5: if that the robin is both holy and not inadvisable is not true the reagent does bonnet Azerbaijan. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the alternator is spectral and is not a kind of a Spinoza is not incorrect is not correct then the Luger dissociates. sent7: if something bonnets Azerbaijan then it is inadvisable. sent8: the robin is not holy. sent9: the fact that the alternator is spectral and a Spinoza does not hold if something is not apopemptic. sent10: something is not a Spinoza if that it is non-apopemptic and it is a kind of a Spinoza is incorrect. sent11: the alternator is not a azurite if the fact that it is not a flag and it does visa marlin is incorrect. sent12: the fact that that something is holy and is not inadvisable is right is wrong if it is spectral. sent13: if the robin is apopemptic then it does bonnet Azerbaijan. sent14: if the robin is not apopemptic but it dissociates then the Luger does not dissociates. sent15: the alternator is holy but it is not inadvisable if there is something such that it is not spectral. sent16: the fact that the robin is inadvisable but it is not holy does not hold. sent17: that that the alternator is spectral but it is not a Spinoza does not hold hold if there exists something such that it is not apopemptic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the robin is apopemptic.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the robin bonnets Azerbaijan.; sent7 -> int2: the robin is inadvisable if it does bonnet Azerbaijan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the robin is inadvisable.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the robin is inadvisable but it is not holy.; int4 & sent16 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that that the robin is apopemptic is not incorrect does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there are non-apopemptic things.; int7 & sent17 -> int8: that the alternator is spectral but not a Spinoza does not hold.; int8 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the reagent is not a Spinoza.
sent10 -> int9: the reagent is not a Spinoza if the fact that that it is not apopemptic and it is a kind of a Spinoza is right is incorrect.; sent3 -> int10: if the reagent does bonnet Azerbaijan that it is both not apopemptic and a Spinoza is not right.; sent12 -> int11: if the robin is spectral then that it is holy and is not inadvisable is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the Luger does dissociate. ; $context$ = sent1: the robin is spectral if that it dissociates does not hold. sent2: the robin is not inadvisable if the alternator is holy and is not inadvisable. sent3: the fact that something is not apopemptic but it is a Spinoza does not hold if it does bonnet Azerbaijan. sent4: if something is a kind of a Spinoza it is not spectral. sent5: if that the robin is both holy and not inadvisable is not true the reagent does bonnet Azerbaijan. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the alternator is spectral and is not a kind of a Spinoza is not incorrect is not correct then the Luger dissociates. sent7: if something bonnets Azerbaijan then it is inadvisable. sent8: the robin is not holy. sent9: the fact that the alternator is spectral and a Spinoza does not hold if something is not apopemptic. sent10: something is not a Spinoza if that it is non-apopemptic and it is a kind of a Spinoza is incorrect. sent11: the alternator is not a azurite if the fact that it is not a flag and it does visa marlin is incorrect. sent12: the fact that that something is holy and is not inadvisable is right is wrong if it is spectral. sent13: if the robin is apopemptic then it does bonnet Azerbaijan. sent14: if the robin is not apopemptic but it dissociates then the Luger does not dissociates. sent15: the alternator is holy but it is not inadvisable if there is something such that it is not spectral. sent16: the fact that the robin is inadvisable but it is not holy does not hold. sent17: that that the alternator is spectral but it is not a Spinoza does not hold hold if there exists something such that it is not apopemptic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the robin is apopemptic.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the robin bonnets Azerbaijan.; sent7 -> int2: the robin is inadvisable if it does bonnet Azerbaijan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the robin is inadvisable.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the robin is inadvisable but it is not holy.; int4 & sent16 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that that the robin is apopemptic is not incorrect does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there are non-apopemptic things.; int7 & sent17 -> int8: that the alternator is spectral but not a Spinoza does not hold.; int8 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__