the fraction is Romany and it basks schmuck.
sent1: if the Garand deplores souring then the fraction is a Romany. sent2: something is poetic and it is a kind of a 24/7. sent3: if the zeolite does bask schmuck the fraction does bask schmuck. sent4: the equerry is a kind of a Murrow. sent5: the zeolite deplores souring. sent6: that the townee is a kind of a Murrow and it is a 24/7 does not hold. sent7: The schmuck basks zeolite. sent8: the zeolite basks schmuck. sent9: if the Garand does not deplore souring the fact that the townee is both poetic and a 24/7 is not correct. sent10: the equerry is not a Murrow if something is not poetic. sent11: the equerry is not a Murrow if there is something such that that it is both not non-poetic and a 24/7 does not hold. sent12: the fact that the fraction is a Romany and it basks schmuck is incorrect if it does not deplore souring. sent13: if the fraction does not bask schmuck then the fact that the fact that the Garand is a kind of a Murrow that does deplore souring is not right hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Garand does not deplore souring.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: that the townee is poetic thing that is a 24/7 is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is poetic and a 24/7 is wrong.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the equerry is not a Murrow.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the Garand deplores souring is not incorrect.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the fraction is Romany.; sent3 & sent8 -> int7: the fraction basks schmuck.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the fraction is a Romany and it basks schmuck is not correct.
$hypothesis$ = the fraction is Romany and it basks schmuck. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Garand deplores souring then the fraction is a Romany. sent2: something is poetic and it is a kind of a 24/7. sent3: if the zeolite does bask schmuck the fraction does bask schmuck. sent4: the equerry is a kind of a Murrow. sent5: the zeolite deplores souring. sent6: that the townee is a kind of a Murrow and it is a 24/7 does not hold. sent7: The schmuck basks zeolite. sent8: the zeolite basks schmuck. sent9: if the Garand does not deplore souring the fact that the townee is both poetic and a 24/7 is not correct. sent10: the equerry is not a Murrow if something is not poetic. sent11: the equerry is not a Murrow if there is something such that that it is both not non-poetic and a 24/7 does not hold. sent12: the fact that the fraction is a Romany and it basks schmuck is incorrect if it does not deplore souring. sent13: if the fraction does not bask schmuck then the fact that the fact that the Garand is a kind of a Murrow that does deplore souring is not right hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Garand does not deplore souring.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: that the townee is poetic thing that is a 24/7 is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is poetic and a 24/7 is wrong.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the equerry is not a Murrow.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the Garand deplores souring is not incorrect.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the fraction is Romany.; sent3 & sent8 -> int7: the fraction basks schmuck.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__