the woodruff is not aphaeretic.
sent1: if the towpath is not a grogginess and it is not a bronze then the rathskeller is a grogginess. sent2: something is not non-aphaeretic and it is dendritic if it is not a Nudibranchia. sent3: the fact that the zarf is not an affined hold if there exists something such that it is dendritic. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Nudibranchia does not hold then the woodruff is both not aphaeretic and not a grogginess. sent5: the rathskeller is non-dendritic if there exists something such that it is ulcerative. sent6: there exists something such that that the fact that it does rejuvenate and it is ulcerative is not wrong is not true. sent7: if something is not aphaeretic then it is not a kind of a preserver and it is a kind of a Nudibranchia. sent8: the fact that something is aphaeretic thing that is not a megawatt is not true if it is a grogginess. sent9: there exists something such that it is a Nudibranchia. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that it is aphaeretic and it is not a kind of a megawatt is not true then the zarf is not aphaeretic. sent11: if something is a cobblers then it is dendritic. sent12: the Andorran is not ulcerative. sent13: the woodruff does not shaft genuflection and/or it is a kind of a cobblers. sent14: the woodruff is not a kind of a grogginess. sent15: the microfossil is not a Nudibranchia if the Andorran rejuvenates and it is ulcerative. sent16: the microfossil is a cobblers if either the woodruff does not shaft genuflection or it is a cobblers or both. sent17: if there is something such that that it rejuvenates and is not ulcerative is not right then the rathskeller is not dendritic. sent18: everything is dendritic. sent19: that the Andorran rejuvenates and it is ulcerative is false. sent20: the towpath is not a grogginess and not a bronze.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Andorran does rejuvenate and is not ulcerative is false.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does rejuvenate and it is not ulcerative is incorrect.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the rathskeller is not dendritic.; sent18 -> int3: that the rathskeller is dendritic is correct.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the Andorran does rejuvenate and is not ulcerative.;
the woodruff is aphaeretic.
sent2 -> int6: if the woodruff is not a Nudibranchia it is aphaeretic and is dendritic.;
$hypothesis$ = the woodruff is not aphaeretic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the towpath is not a grogginess and it is not a bronze then the rathskeller is a grogginess. sent2: something is not non-aphaeretic and it is dendritic if it is not a Nudibranchia. sent3: the fact that the zarf is not an affined hold if there exists something such that it is dendritic. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Nudibranchia does not hold then the woodruff is both not aphaeretic and not a grogginess. sent5: the rathskeller is non-dendritic if there exists something such that it is ulcerative. sent6: there exists something such that that the fact that it does rejuvenate and it is ulcerative is not wrong is not true. sent7: if something is not aphaeretic then it is not a kind of a preserver and it is a kind of a Nudibranchia. sent8: the fact that something is aphaeretic thing that is not a megawatt is not true if it is a grogginess. sent9: there exists something such that it is a Nudibranchia. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that it is aphaeretic and it is not a kind of a megawatt is not true then the zarf is not aphaeretic. sent11: if something is a cobblers then it is dendritic. sent12: the Andorran is not ulcerative. sent13: the woodruff does not shaft genuflection and/or it is a kind of a cobblers. sent14: the woodruff is not a kind of a grogginess. sent15: the microfossil is not a Nudibranchia if the Andorran rejuvenates and it is ulcerative. sent16: the microfossil is a cobblers if either the woodruff does not shaft genuflection or it is a cobblers or both. sent17: if there is something such that that it rejuvenates and is not ulcerative is not right then the rathskeller is not dendritic. sent18: everything is dendritic. sent19: that the Andorran rejuvenates and it is ulcerative is false. sent20: the towpath is not a grogginess and not a bronze. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Andorran does rejuvenate and is not ulcerative is false.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does rejuvenate and it is not ulcerative is incorrect.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the rathskeller is not dendritic.; sent18 -> int3: that the rathskeller is dendritic is correct.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the Andorran does rejuvenate and is not ulcerative.; __UNKNOWN__