the misogamist is not an ultrasound.
sent1: if that something is not aniseikonic but it is a kind of a cookbook does not hold it is aniseikonic. sent2: the habitation is either neurophysiological or archiepiscopal or both. sent3: that the habitation is not neurophysiological and/or it is archiepiscopal is false if the syncarp is a cookbook. sent4: the syncarp is a cookbook. sent5: something is an ultrasound if it is a cookbook. sent6: the habitation is not neurophysiological and/or it is archiepiscopal if the misogamist is a kind of an ultrasound.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the misogamist is an ultrasound.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the habitation is not neurophysiological and/or it is archiepiscopal.; sent3 & sent4 -> int2: that either the habitation is not neurophysiological or it is archiepiscopal or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the syncarp is aniseikonic.
sent1 -> int4: if the fact that the syncarp is not aniseikonic but it is a cookbook is not true then it is aniseikonic.;
$hypothesis$ = the misogamist is not an ultrasound. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not aniseikonic but it is a kind of a cookbook does not hold it is aniseikonic. sent2: the habitation is either neurophysiological or archiepiscopal or both. sent3: that the habitation is not neurophysiological and/or it is archiepiscopal is false if the syncarp is a cookbook. sent4: the syncarp is a cookbook. sent5: something is an ultrasound if it is a cookbook. sent6: the habitation is not neurophysiological and/or it is archiepiscopal if the misogamist is a kind of an ultrasound. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the misogamist is an ultrasound.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the habitation is not neurophysiological and/or it is archiepiscopal.; sent3 & sent4 -> int2: that either the habitation is not neurophysiological or it is archiepiscopal or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__