the delegate does riffle Garfield.
sent1: that the assimilation is incorrigible and it is a horsecloth is not true. sent2: the delegate is not moonless if the torch is not missionary and it is not bottom-up. sent3: that something is not incorrigible but it is a horsecloth is not correct if it is not moonless. sent4: the fact that something is incorrigible thing that is a kind of a horsecloth is not true if it is moonlit. sent5: if the assimilation is not moonless then the fact that the fact that it is a kind of incorrigible a horsecloth is not false is incorrect. sent6: the torch is non-missionary and is not bottom-up if the cockpit is Aleutians. sent7: if the fact that the assimilation is incorrigible is true then the torch is not bottom-up. sent8: the arm is either compound or not a standee or both if the ampicillin does not bankrupt tomograph. sent9: the torch is missionary. sent10: the torch is incorrigible. sent11: something is bottom-up if it is a missionary. sent12: if something is not moonless it does not riffle Garfield. sent13: the fact that the torch is not bottom-up if that the assimilation is not incorrigible but a horsecloth is not correct hold.
sent3 -> int1: the fact that the assimilation is not incorrigible but it is a kind of a horsecloth is not correct if it is not moonless.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the assimilation is not moonless is correct.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the assimilation is not incorrigible but it is a kind of a horsecloth does not hold.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the torch is not bottom-up.; sent11 -> int4: if the torch is missionary it is bottom-up.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the torch is bottom-up.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the assimilation is not moonlit.;
the delegate does not riffle Garfield.
sent12 -> int8: if the delegate is not moonless then it does not riffle Garfield.;
$hypothesis$ = the delegate does riffle Garfield. ; $context$ = sent1: that the assimilation is incorrigible and it is a horsecloth is not true. sent2: the delegate is not moonless if the torch is not missionary and it is not bottom-up. sent3: that something is not incorrigible but it is a horsecloth is not correct if it is not moonless. sent4: the fact that something is incorrigible thing that is a kind of a horsecloth is not true if it is moonlit. sent5: if the assimilation is not moonless then the fact that the fact that it is a kind of incorrigible a horsecloth is not false is incorrect. sent6: the torch is non-missionary and is not bottom-up if the cockpit is Aleutians. sent7: if the fact that the assimilation is incorrigible is true then the torch is not bottom-up. sent8: the arm is either compound or not a standee or both if the ampicillin does not bankrupt tomograph. sent9: the torch is missionary. sent10: the torch is incorrigible. sent11: something is bottom-up if it is a missionary. sent12: if something is not moonless it does not riffle Garfield. sent13: the fact that the torch is not bottom-up if that the assimilation is not incorrigible but a horsecloth is not correct hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> int1: the fact that the assimilation is not incorrigible but it is a kind of a horsecloth is not correct if it is not moonless.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the assimilation is not moonless is correct.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the assimilation is not incorrigible but it is a kind of a horsecloth does not hold.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the torch is not bottom-up.; sent11 -> int4: if the torch is missionary it is bottom-up.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the torch is bottom-up.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the assimilation is not moonlit.; __UNKNOWN__