the melamine is not a kind of a roof and it is not excusable.
sent1: the crampon is not a down. sent2: the dribbler does reward dribbler if the objectification is not a snuffle and is not a nondevelopment. sent3: the trophoblast slags infatuation if the dribbler does reward dribbler. sent4: there exists something such that it is not a nondevelopment or it is not arthromeric or both. sent5: the fact that if something is meaningless then the melamine is both not a roof and not excusable is not false. sent6: if something is not a kind of a thornbill that it is not a Gorky and it is not a kind of a scale is wrong. sent7: if the trophoblast is a mnemonics then that the dribbler is meaningless is not incorrect. sent8: the crampon does not down and it is not an adjective. sent9: if that something is a thornbill but it is not a straightaway is not correct it is not a thornbill. sent10: something is a orthoepist if it does slag infatuation. sent11: if something is not meaningless the fact that it is not a kind of a roof and it is not excusable is not true. sent12: the melamine is inexcusable if there exists something such that it is meaningless. sent13: if the crampon does not down and it is not an adjective the trophoblast is a kind of a mnemonics. sent14: the objectification does not snuffle. sent15: the fact that the crampon is a kind of a thornbill and is not a kind of a straightaway is false if the trophoblast is a kind of a orthoepist. sent16: something is not meaningless if that it is not non-mnemonics hold. sent17: that the objectification is not a kind of a nondevelopment is right if something is not a kind of a nondevelopment and/or it is not arthromeric.
sent13 & sent8 -> int1: the trophoblast is a mnemonics.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the dribbler is meaningless.; int2 -> int3: something is meaningless.; int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
that the melamine is both not a roof and not excusable is not true.
sent11 -> int4: if the melamine is not meaningless then the fact that it is both not a roof and not excusable is not right.; sent16 -> int5: if the melamine is a mnemonics it is not meaningless.; sent6 -> int6: that the crampon is not a Gorky and it is not a kind of a scale is false if it is not a thornbill.; sent9 -> int7: the crampon is not a thornbill if the fact that it is a thornbill and it is not a kind of a straightaway is wrong.; sent10 -> int8: the trophoblast is a kind of a orthoepist if it does slag infatuation.; sent4 & sent17 -> int9: the objectification is not a kind of a nondevelopment.; sent14 & int9 -> int10: the objectification is not a kind of a snuffle and it is not a kind of a nondevelopment.; sent2 & int10 -> int11: the dribbler rewards dribbler.; sent3 & int11 -> int12: the trophoblast slags infatuation.; int8 & int12 -> int13: the trophoblast is a kind of a orthoepist.; sent15 & int13 -> int14: that the crampon is a thornbill but not a straightaway is incorrect.; int7 & int14 -> int15: the crampon is not a thornbill.; int6 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the crampon is not a kind of a Gorky and it is not a kind of a scale is false.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Gorky and it does not scale is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the melamine is not a kind of a roof and it is not excusable. ; $context$ = sent1: the crampon is not a down. sent2: the dribbler does reward dribbler if the objectification is not a snuffle and is not a nondevelopment. sent3: the trophoblast slags infatuation if the dribbler does reward dribbler. sent4: there exists something such that it is not a nondevelopment or it is not arthromeric or both. sent5: the fact that if something is meaningless then the melamine is both not a roof and not excusable is not false. sent6: if something is not a kind of a thornbill that it is not a Gorky and it is not a kind of a scale is wrong. sent7: if the trophoblast is a mnemonics then that the dribbler is meaningless is not incorrect. sent8: the crampon does not down and it is not an adjective. sent9: if that something is a thornbill but it is not a straightaway is not correct it is not a thornbill. sent10: something is a orthoepist if it does slag infatuation. sent11: if something is not meaningless the fact that it is not a kind of a roof and it is not excusable is not true. sent12: the melamine is inexcusable if there exists something such that it is meaningless. sent13: if the crampon does not down and it is not an adjective the trophoblast is a kind of a mnemonics. sent14: the objectification does not snuffle. sent15: the fact that the crampon is a kind of a thornbill and is not a kind of a straightaway is false if the trophoblast is a kind of a orthoepist. sent16: something is not meaningless if that it is not non-mnemonics hold. sent17: that the objectification is not a kind of a nondevelopment is right if something is not a kind of a nondevelopment and/or it is not arthromeric. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 & sent8 -> int1: the trophoblast is a mnemonics.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the dribbler is meaningless.; int2 -> int3: something is meaningless.; int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__