the fact that the peony is exculpatory but it does not eliminate reversed is not correct if the sedum is not a compliment.
sent1: if the sedum compliments then the fact that the peony is exculpatory and does not eliminate reversed is not true. sent2: the sedum compliments if the blolly barbs swineherd. sent3: if the peony barbs loanblend the fact that the blolly barbs loanblend and barbs swineherd is wrong. sent4: the fact that the blolly does barb loanblend and barbs swineherd is wrong. sent5: the peony is not a diocesan. sent6: if that the sedum does not compliment is right then the peony is exculpatory but it does not eliminate reversed. sent7: the blolly is not a senna. sent8: if something does not eliminate reversed and is not a diocesan it is a senna. sent9: a senna barbs loanblend. sent10: the fact that the blolly does barb loanblend and does not barb swineherd does not hold if the peony does barb loanblend. sent11: the peony is exculpatory. sent12: the sedum does compliment if the fact that the blolly barbs loanblend but it does not barb swineherd does not hold.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the peony is exculpatory but it does not eliminate reversed.; assump2 -> int1: the peony does not eliminate reversed.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the peony does not eliminate reversed and is not diocesan.; sent8 -> int3: if the peony does not eliminate reversed and it is not a kind of a diocesan it is a senna.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the peony is a senna is correct.; sent9 -> int5: if the peony is a senna the fact that it barbs loanblend is correct.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the peony barbs loanblend.; int6 & sent10 -> int7: that the blolly barbs loanblend but it does not barb swineherd is false.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the sedum does compliment.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sedum is not a kind of a compliment.; int8 & assump1 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int9 -> int10: that the fact that the peony is a kind of exculpatory thing that does not eliminate reversed is not wrong is false.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the peony is exculpatory but it does not eliminate reversed is not correct if the sedum is not a compliment. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sedum compliments then the fact that the peony is exculpatory and does not eliminate reversed is not true. sent2: the sedum compliments if the blolly barbs swineherd. sent3: if the peony barbs loanblend the fact that the blolly barbs loanblend and barbs swineherd is wrong. sent4: the fact that the blolly does barb loanblend and barbs swineherd is wrong. sent5: the peony is not a diocesan. sent6: if that the sedum does not compliment is right then the peony is exculpatory but it does not eliminate reversed. sent7: the blolly is not a senna. sent8: if something does not eliminate reversed and is not a diocesan it is a senna. sent9: a senna barbs loanblend. sent10: the fact that the blolly does barb loanblend and does not barb swineherd does not hold if the peony does barb loanblend. sent11: the peony is exculpatory. sent12: the sedum does compliment if the fact that the blolly barbs loanblend but it does not barb swineherd does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the peony is exculpatory but it does not eliminate reversed.; assump2 -> int1: the peony does not eliminate reversed.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the peony does not eliminate reversed and is not diocesan.; sent8 -> int3: if the peony does not eliminate reversed and it is not a kind of a diocesan it is a senna.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the peony is a senna is correct.; sent9 -> int5: if the peony is a senna the fact that it barbs loanblend is correct.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the peony barbs loanblend.; int6 & sent10 -> int7: that the blolly barbs loanblend but it does not barb swineherd is false.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the sedum does compliment.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sedum is not a kind of a compliment.; int8 & assump1 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int9 -> int10: that the fact that the peony is a kind of exculpatory thing that does not eliminate reversed is not wrong is false.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__