the theist is a ridge.
sent1: the theist does not finish orchil if the fact that it is a kind of a otoscope and it is not an aliyah does not hold. sent2: if the theist does not finish orchil then it is a shroud. sent3: something is a ridge if it is amaurotic. sent4: if the fact that the theist does not splat vermouth hold then that it is a otoscope and it is not an aliyah is not correct. sent5: the theist is not ulcerative. sent6: the Pitman is not amaurotic if there is something such that that it is piscine and is favorable is not correct. sent7: something is amaurotic if it splats vermouth. sent8: the estrogen does not shroud if there exists something such that it is not amaurotic. sent9: the theist is not a shroud. sent10: the fact that the formal is piscine thing that is favorable does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the theist does not splat vermouth.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: that the theist is a kind of a otoscope that is not a kind of an aliyah is wrong.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the theist does not finish orchil.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the theist is a shroud.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the theist splats vermouth.; sent7 -> int6: the theist is amaurotic if it splats vermouth.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the theist is amaurotic.; sent3 -> int8: the theist is a ridge if it is amaurotic.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis;
the theist does not ridge.
sent10 -> int9: there exists something such that that it is a kind of piscine thing that is favorable does not hold.; int9 & sent6 -> int10: the Pitman is not amaurotic.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that it is not amaurotic.; int11 & sent8 -> int12: the estrogen is not a shroud.;
$hypothesis$ = the theist is a ridge. ; $context$ = sent1: the theist does not finish orchil if the fact that it is a kind of a otoscope and it is not an aliyah does not hold. sent2: if the theist does not finish orchil then it is a shroud. sent3: something is a ridge if it is amaurotic. sent4: if the fact that the theist does not splat vermouth hold then that it is a otoscope and it is not an aliyah is not correct. sent5: the theist is not ulcerative. sent6: the Pitman is not amaurotic if there is something such that that it is piscine and is favorable is not correct. sent7: something is amaurotic if it splats vermouth. sent8: the estrogen does not shroud if there exists something such that it is not amaurotic. sent9: the theist is not a shroud. sent10: the fact that the formal is piscine thing that is favorable does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the theist does not splat vermouth.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: that the theist is a kind of a otoscope that is not a kind of an aliyah is wrong.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the theist does not finish orchil.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the theist is a shroud.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the theist splats vermouth.; sent7 -> int6: the theist is amaurotic if it splats vermouth.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the theist is amaurotic.; sent3 -> int8: the theist is a ridge if it is amaurotic.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__