the fact that the haircut is not a tenth but it is a kind of a market is not correct.
sent1: if something does pity bagman then the paintball is a market. sent2: the paintball pities Patroclus and does not swap Norrish. sent3: something is not a kind of a tenth but it markets if it does not pity bagman. sent4: that the paintball does not pity bagman is right if the fact that it pities Patroclus and does swap Norrish hold. sent5: something is not irreversible if it is revolutionary. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a tenth and does pity bagman does not hold. sent7: the fact that the render does not pity bagman is right. sent8: the render is not reasonable. sent9: if the pyrostat is not irreversible the izar does market. sent10: the pyrostat is revolutionary if the render is not reasonable but it is a care. sent11: the fact that the haircut does not pity Patroclus is correct. sent12: there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-irreversible and pities bagman is incorrect. sent13: the render is not revolutionary. sent14: if the izar does market that the haircut is not a tenth but it is a market does not hold. sent15: if there are reasonable things then the paintball pities bagman. sent16: if a revolutionary thing is not irreversible then the pyrostat does pity bagman. sent17: there exists something such that the fact that it is reasonable and is a care is wrong. sent18: if the render is not a care and does pity Patroclus then the paintball swaps Norrish. sent19: the paintball does not pity bagman if it pities Patroclus and it does not swap Norrish. sent20: the fact that the paintball is not revolutionary is not incorrect. sent21: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a tenth and is a kind of a care is not correct. sent22: something that is not a market is both revolutionary and not irreversible. sent23: the paintball does not swap Norrish but it is irreversible. sent24: the paintball does pity bagman if there exists something such that the fact that it is not reasonable and it is a care is not true. sent25: if the paintball is a market and does pity Patroclus then the haircut does pity bagman.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the render is not reasonable and is a care does not hold.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not reasonable but a care is not right.; int1 & sent24 -> int2: the paintball pities bagman.; sent19 & sent2 -> int3: the paintball does not pity bagman.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the render is a kind of unreasonable a care.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the pyrostat is not non-revolutionary hold.; sent5 -> int7: if the pyrostat is revolutionary then it is not irreversible.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the pyrostat is non-irreversible.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the izar is a market.; int9 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that that it does not pity chancery and it is a sachem does not hold.
sent22 -> int10: if the izar does not market it is revolutionary and it is not irreversible.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the haircut is not a tenth but it is a kind of a market is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does pity bagman then the paintball is a market. sent2: the paintball pities Patroclus and does not swap Norrish. sent3: something is not a kind of a tenth but it markets if it does not pity bagman. sent4: that the paintball does not pity bagman is right if the fact that it pities Patroclus and does swap Norrish hold. sent5: something is not irreversible if it is revolutionary. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a tenth and does pity bagman does not hold. sent7: the fact that the render does not pity bagman is right. sent8: the render is not reasonable. sent9: if the pyrostat is not irreversible the izar does market. sent10: the pyrostat is revolutionary if the render is not reasonable but it is a care. sent11: the fact that the haircut does not pity Patroclus is correct. sent12: there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-irreversible and pities bagman is incorrect. sent13: the render is not revolutionary. sent14: if the izar does market that the haircut is not a tenth but it is a market does not hold. sent15: if there are reasonable things then the paintball pities bagman. sent16: if a revolutionary thing is not irreversible then the pyrostat does pity bagman. sent17: there exists something such that the fact that it is reasonable and is a care is wrong. sent18: if the render is not a care and does pity Patroclus then the paintball swaps Norrish. sent19: the paintball does not pity bagman if it pities Patroclus and it does not swap Norrish. sent20: the fact that the paintball is not revolutionary is not incorrect. sent21: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a tenth and is a kind of a care is not correct. sent22: something that is not a market is both revolutionary and not irreversible. sent23: the paintball does not swap Norrish but it is irreversible. sent24: the paintball does pity bagman if there exists something such that the fact that it is not reasonable and it is a care is not true. sent25: if the paintball is a market and does pity Patroclus then the haircut does pity bagman. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the render is not reasonable and is a care does not hold.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not reasonable but a care is not right.; int1 & sent24 -> int2: the paintball pities bagman.; sent19 & sent2 -> int3: the paintball does not pity bagman.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the render is a kind of unreasonable a care.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the pyrostat is not non-revolutionary hold.; sent5 -> int7: if the pyrostat is revolutionary then it is not irreversible.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the pyrostat is non-irreversible.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the izar is a market.; int9 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__