if the murderess does demote clonidine the enemy is mammalian.
sent1: if something is a tenpins then the fact that it is not eparchial but non-little is wrong. sent2: the tomato is a Tyche. sent3: the enemy does demote clonidine if something that brads gust is not avifaunal. sent4: the fact that the chin is not mammalian is right if there exists something such that that it is non-eparchial thing that is not a little is false. sent5: if the tomato is a Tyche then the osmiridium brads gust and is not avifaunal. sent6: the boathouse is a kind of a tenpins if there exists something such that the fact that that it is both a Arendt and ebracteate is not false is incorrect. sent7: if that the enemy demotes clonidine and it demotes micrometry is wrong that the murderess is not a quibble hold. sent8: if the enemy is not a quibble then the murderess does not demote clonidine. sent9: the murderess is not mammalian if the fact that the enemy demotes clonidine and does demote micrometry is not right. sent10: that the murderess does demote clonidine and it is mammalian is not true. sent11: that the enemy is a quibble that does demote micrometry is not correct if the fact that it is not mammalian hold. sent12: the duckpins is not light-duty. sent13: that the revolver is not non-mammalian hold. sent14: if the murderess is mammalian the enemy demotes clonidine. sent15: if the enemy demotes clonidine and it does demote micrometry then the murderess does not demote micrometry. sent16: if that the enemy does quibble and does demote micrometry is not correct the murderess does demote clonidine. sent17: that the murderess is neurological is not wrong. sent18: the murderess does not demote clonidine if the fact that the enemy is a quibble and it does demote micrometry is not right. sent19: the fact that the duckpins is a Arendt that is ebracteate does not hold if the fact that it is not light-duty is true.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the enemy is not mammalian.; sent11 & assump2 -> int1: that the enemy is a quibble and does demote micrometry is incorrect.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the murderess does not demote clonidine.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the murderess does demote clonidine is not false.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int3 -> int4: the enemy is mammalian.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the murderess does not demote micrometry.
sent5 & sent2 -> int5: the osmiridium does brad gust and is not avifaunal.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it brads gust and it is not avifaunal.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the enemy demotes clonidine.; sent1 -> int8: if that the boathouse is a kind of a tenpins is true then the fact that it is not eparchial and it is not a little is incorrect.; sent19 & sent12 -> int9: that the duckpins is a kind of a Arendt and it is ebracteate does not hold.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is a Arendt and is ebracteate hold does not hold.; int10 & sent6 -> int11: the fact that the boathouse is a tenpins hold.; int8 & int11 -> int12: that the fact that the boathouse is not eparchial and it is not little hold is wrong.; int12 -> int13: the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it is both not eparchial and non-little is not correct is not incorrect.; int13 & sent4 -> int14: the chin is not mammalian.; int14 -> int15: that something is not mammalian is not false.;
$hypothesis$ = if the murderess does demote clonidine the enemy is mammalian. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a tenpins then the fact that it is not eparchial but non-little is wrong. sent2: the tomato is a Tyche. sent3: the enemy does demote clonidine if something that brads gust is not avifaunal. sent4: the fact that the chin is not mammalian is right if there exists something such that that it is non-eparchial thing that is not a little is false. sent5: if the tomato is a Tyche then the osmiridium brads gust and is not avifaunal. sent6: the boathouse is a kind of a tenpins if there exists something such that the fact that that it is both a Arendt and ebracteate is not false is incorrect. sent7: if that the enemy demotes clonidine and it demotes micrometry is wrong that the murderess is not a quibble hold. sent8: if the enemy is not a quibble then the murderess does not demote clonidine. sent9: the murderess is not mammalian if the fact that the enemy demotes clonidine and does demote micrometry is not right. sent10: that the murderess does demote clonidine and it is mammalian is not true. sent11: that the enemy is a quibble that does demote micrometry is not correct if the fact that it is not mammalian hold. sent12: the duckpins is not light-duty. sent13: that the revolver is not non-mammalian hold. sent14: if the murderess is mammalian the enemy demotes clonidine. sent15: if the enemy demotes clonidine and it does demote micrometry then the murderess does not demote micrometry. sent16: if that the enemy does quibble and does demote micrometry is not correct the murderess does demote clonidine. sent17: that the murderess is neurological is not wrong. sent18: the murderess does not demote clonidine if the fact that the enemy is a quibble and it does demote micrometry is not right. sent19: the fact that the duckpins is a Arendt that is ebracteate does not hold if the fact that it is not light-duty is true. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the enemy is not mammalian.; sent11 & assump2 -> int1: that the enemy is a quibble and does demote micrometry is incorrect.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the murderess does not demote clonidine.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the murderess does demote clonidine is not false.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int3 -> int4: the enemy is mammalian.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__