either the cattalo is not open-hearth or it is a epergne or both.
sent1: the agamid is both not a Hippo and not cataplastic. sent2: if the visor is a epergne and it is open-hearth the have is not a kind of a crevasse. sent3: that that the luff is a epergne and is not a prothrombin is wrong is true. sent4: if something is not a kind of a Hippo and it is not cataplastic it does not exult terrine. sent5: the cattalo is not open-hearth if that it is not unsavory and it is pretentious is false. sent6: the agamid does claw Wycherley and it does corrode Anglian if that the have is not a crevasse is not false. sent7: that the cattalo is not a crevasse and/or it does claw Wycherley does not hold. sent8: the cattalo does not claw Wycherley if the agamid does not exult terrine and it does not claw Wycherley. sent9: the xerox exults terrine and is noninvasive. sent10: the cattalo is a kind of a gallows-tree that is not a foremast. sent11: either the defoliant is not a borderland or it is a kind of a crevasse or both. sent12: the cattalo does not expose and/or exults terrine. sent13: something is not a crevasse if it is savory thing that is not unpretentious.
sent13 -> int1: if the cattalo is a savory but it is not unpretentious then it is not a kind of a crevasse.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cattalo is a savory but it is ostentatious.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the cattalo is not a kind of a crevasse.; int2 -> int3: the cattalo either is not a crevasse or does claw Wycherley or both.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the cattalo is a savory and not unpretentious is not correct.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the cattalo is not open-hearth.; int6 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the fact that the cattalo either is not open-hearth or is a epergne or both is not true hold.
sent4 -> int7: if the agamid is not a Hippo and it is not cataplastic the fact that it does not exult terrine hold.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: the agamid does not exult terrine.;
$hypothesis$ = either the cattalo is not open-hearth or it is a epergne or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the agamid is both not a Hippo and not cataplastic. sent2: if the visor is a epergne and it is open-hearth the have is not a kind of a crevasse. sent3: that that the luff is a epergne and is not a prothrombin is wrong is true. sent4: if something is not a kind of a Hippo and it is not cataplastic it does not exult terrine. sent5: the cattalo is not open-hearth if that it is not unsavory and it is pretentious is false. sent6: the agamid does claw Wycherley and it does corrode Anglian if that the have is not a crevasse is not false. sent7: that the cattalo is not a crevasse and/or it does claw Wycherley does not hold. sent8: the cattalo does not claw Wycherley if the agamid does not exult terrine and it does not claw Wycherley. sent9: the xerox exults terrine and is noninvasive. sent10: the cattalo is a kind of a gallows-tree that is not a foremast. sent11: either the defoliant is not a borderland or it is a kind of a crevasse or both. sent12: the cattalo does not expose and/or exults terrine. sent13: something is not a crevasse if it is savory thing that is not unpretentious. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 -> int1: if the cattalo is a savory but it is not unpretentious then it is not a kind of a crevasse.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cattalo is a savory but it is ostentatious.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the cattalo is not a kind of a crevasse.; int2 -> int3: the cattalo either is not a crevasse or does claw Wycherley or both.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the cattalo is a savory and not unpretentious is not correct.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the cattalo is not open-hearth.; int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__