the automat refrains Elapidae.
sent1: that that the crap is not a Pythia and is a kind of a cere is wrong is not wrong if it is a shinny. sent2: if the siloxane is metacentric the fact that the outdoorswoman is taxonomic is true. sent3: there exists something such that that it is not a shower and it is not a Menuridae is wrong. sent4: if there exists something such that that it does not shower and it is not a Menuridae is not correct then the outdoorswoman shower. sent5: the automat is not taxonomic if the outdoorswoman does not cere. sent6: the crap is not a shinny if the fact that it is not a kind of a cere is not incorrect. sent7: if something that is not a kind of a shower does not gorge outdoorswoman it does not refrain Elapidae. sent8: if the automat is metacentric then that the siloxane refrains Elapidae is correct. sent9: The run refrains slash. sent10: if the outdoorswoman is taxonomic and it does gorge outdoorswoman then the crap does not cere. sent11: if the outdoorswoman does not gorge outdoorswoman the fact that it is not a kind of a shower is right. sent12: if something is not a cere then the fact that either it is a kind of a Pythia or it is a shinny or both is not right. sent13: if there is something such that it does refrain run then that the siloxane is either metacentric or taxonomic or both hold. sent14: the slash refrains run. sent15: the automat does refrain Elapidae if there exists something such that that it is a Pythia or is a shinny or both is not right. sent16: there is something such that it is not a Pythia. sent17: the outdoorswoman is taxonomic if the siloxane is taxonomic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the outdoorswoman does not gorge outdoorswoman.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the outdoorswoman is not a shower.; sent3 & sent4 -> int2: the outdoorswoman is a shower.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the outdoorswoman does gorge outdoorswoman.; sent14 -> int5: there exists something such that it refrains run.; int5 & sent13 -> int6: the siloxane is metacentric and/or it is taxonomic.; int6 & sent2 & sent17 -> int7: the outdoorswoman is taxonomic.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the outdoorswoman is a kind of taxonomic thing that gorges outdoorswoman.; int8 & sent10 -> int9: the crap does not cere.; sent12 -> int10: if the crap is not a cere then that either it is a Pythia or it is a shinny or both is not correct.; int9 & int10 -> int11: the fact that either the crap is a Pythia or it is a kind of a shinny or both is wrong.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that that it is a Pythia and/or it is a shinny is incorrect.; int12 & sent15 -> hypothesis;
the automat does not refrain Elapidae.
sent7 -> int13: the automat does not refrain Elapidae if it does not shower and it does not gorge outdoorswoman.;
$hypothesis$ = the automat refrains Elapidae. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the crap is not a Pythia and is a kind of a cere is wrong is not wrong if it is a shinny. sent2: if the siloxane is metacentric the fact that the outdoorswoman is taxonomic is true. sent3: there exists something such that that it is not a shower and it is not a Menuridae is wrong. sent4: if there exists something such that that it does not shower and it is not a Menuridae is not correct then the outdoorswoman shower. sent5: the automat is not taxonomic if the outdoorswoman does not cere. sent6: the crap is not a shinny if the fact that it is not a kind of a cere is not incorrect. sent7: if something that is not a kind of a shower does not gorge outdoorswoman it does not refrain Elapidae. sent8: if the automat is metacentric then that the siloxane refrains Elapidae is correct. sent9: The run refrains slash. sent10: if the outdoorswoman is taxonomic and it does gorge outdoorswoman then the crap does not cere. sent11: if the outdoorswoman does not gorge outdoorswoman the fact that it is not a kind of a shower is right. sent12: if something is not a cere then the fact that either it is a kind of a Pythia or it is a shinny or both is not right. sent13: if there is something such that it does refrain run then that the siloxane is either metacentric or taxonomic or both hold. sent14: the slash refrains run. sent15: the automat does refrain Elapidae if there exists something such that that it is a Pythia or is a shinny or both is not right. sent16: there is something such that it is not a Pythia. sent17: the outdoorswoman is taxonomic if the siloxane is taxonomic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the outdoorswoman does not gorge outdoorswoman.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the outdoorswoman is not a shower.; sent3 & sent4 -> int2: the outdoorswoman is a shower.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the outdoorswoman does gorge outdoorswoman.; sent14 -> int5: there exists something such that it refrains run.; int5 & sent13 -> int6: the siloxane is metacentric and/or it is taxonomic.; int6 & sent2 & sent17 -> int7: the outdoorswoman is taxonomic.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the outdoorswoman is a kind of taxonomic thing that gorges outdoorswoman.; int8 & sent10 -> int9: the crap does not cere.; sent12 -> int10: if the crap is not a cere then that either it is a Pythia or it is a shinny or both is not correct.; int9 & int10 -> int11: the fact that either the crap is a Pythia or it is a kind of a shinny or both is wrong.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that that it is a Pythia and/or it is a shinny is incorrect.; int12 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__