the fact that the soffit does not amplify lopsidedness but it does cart is not correct.
sent1: if something is not abundant then it is a fibrocartilage that does surface da'wah. sent2: if the fact that the dragonhead is extant but it does not amplify melody is not correct then the greenfly is not abundant. sent3: the yellowtail surfaces da'wah. sent4: if something is ultramicroscopic and it is a kind of a providence that it is not herbivorous is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the soffit is nonslippery and does not amplify lopsidedness is incorrect. sent6: something is not a hygrodeik if it amplifies lopsidedness and it is nonslippery. sent7: the thunderhead is a hygrodeik. sent8: the thunderhead is nonslippery. sent9: the dragonhead is not extant if that the greenfly surfaces da'wah and does not amplify lopsidedness is not right. sent10: something is not a pregnanediol if it is a kind of a fibrocartilage and it surfaces da'wah. sent11: that something amplifies lopsidedness but it does not amplify melody is not true if it is not extant. sent12: that the greenfly is abundant if that the greenfly does not amplify melody hold is true. sent13: if the yellowtail amplifies melody the fact that the dragonhead is a kind of extant thing that does not amplifies melody is not correct. sent14: the yellowtail amplifies melody if the fact that it does amplify lopsidedness is not wrong. sent15: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a hygrodeik and is nonslippery then the greenfly is a pregnanediol. sent16: something that is not a kind of a pregnanediol amplifies lopsidedness and does amplify melody. sent17: if that the greenfly is a cart that does not amplify lopsidedness does not hold the soffit does not surface da'wah. sent18: if the yellowtail does not amplify lopsidedness the fact that the soffit does not amplify lopsidedness and is a cart is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the yellowtail does amplify lopsidedness.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the yellowtail does amplify melody.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: that the dragonhead is extant but it does not amplify melody is incorrect.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the greenfly is not abundant.; sent1 -> int4: the greenfly is a fibrocartilage and it surfaces da'wah if it is not abundant.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the greenfly is a kind of a fibrocartilage that does surface da'wah.; sent10 -> int6: if the greenfly is a fibrocartilage and surfaces da'wah then it is not a kind of a pregnanediol.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the greenfly is not a pregnanediol.; sent7 & sent8 -> int8: the thunderhead is a hygrodeik and is nonslippery.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it is a hygrodeik and is nonslippery.; int9 & sent15 -> int10: the greenfly is a pregnanediol.; int7 & int10 -> int11: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int11 -> int12: the yellowtail does not amplify lopsidedness.; int12 & sent18 -> hypothesis;
the soffit does not amplify lopsidedness and is a kind of a cart.
sent11 -> int13: if the yellowtail is non-extant then the fact that it does amplify lopsidedness and it does not amplify melody is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the soffit does not amplify lopsidedness but it does cart is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not abundant then it is a fibrocartilage that does surface da'wah. sent2: if the fact that the dragonhead is extant but it does not amplify melody is not correct then the greenfly is not abundant. sent3: the yellowtail surfaces da'wah. sent4: if something is ultramicroscopic and it is a kind of a providence that it is not herbivorous is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the soffit is nonslippery and does not amplify lopsidedness is incorrect. sent6: something is not a hygrodeik if it amplifies lopsidedness and it is nonslippery. sent7: the thunderhead is a hygrodeik. sent8: the thunderhead is nonslippery. sent9: the dragonhead is not extant if that the greenfly surfaces da'wah and does not amplify lopsidedness is not right. sent10: something is not a pregnanediol if it is a kind of a fibrocartilage and it surfaces da'wah. sent11: that something amplifies lopsidedness but it does not amplify melody is not true if it is not extant. sent12: that the greenfly is abundant if that the greenfly does not amplify melody hold is true. sent13: if the yellowtail amplifies melody the fact that the dragonhead is a kind of extant thing that does not amplifies melody is not correct. sent14: the yellowtail amplifies melody if the fact that it does amplify lopsidedness is not wrong. sent15: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a hygrodeik and is nonslippery then the greenfly is a pregnanediol. sent16: something that is not a kind of a pregnanediol amplifies lopsidedness and does amplify melody. sent17: if that the greenfly is a cart that does not amplify lopsidedness does not hold the soffit does not surface da'wah. sent18: if the yellowtail does not amplify lopsidedness the fact that the soffit does not amplify lopsidedness and is a cart is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the yellowtail does amplify lopsidedness.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the yellowtail does amplify melody.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: that the dragonhead is extant but it does not amplify melody is incorrect.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the greenfly is not abundant.; sent1 -> int4: the greenfly is a fibrocartilage and it surfaces da'wah if it is not abundant.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the greenfly is a kind of a fibrocartilage that does surface da'wah.; sent10 -> int6: if the greenfly is a fibrocartilage and surfaces da'wah then it is not a kind of a pregnanediol.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the greenfly is not a pregnanediol.; sent7 & sent8 -> int8: the thunderhead is a hygrodeik and is nonslippery.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it is a hygrodeik and is nonslippery.; int9 & sent15 -> int10: the greenfly is a pregnanediol.; int7 & int10 -> int11: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int11 -> int12: the yellowtail does not amplify lopsidedness.; int12 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__