if the wank is not denominational the esthete is a spoil and it is seismological.
sent1: there exists something such that it is seismological. sent2: if the ganger does panic cowgirl then the cowgirl is a kind of a Chiroptera. sent3: The cowgirl does panic ganger. sent4: the fact that the esthete is a spoil and it is capable is not true. sent5: the esthete is a kind of a spoil if that it is not a kind of a spoil and it is not incapable does not hold. sent6: if the cowgirl is a Chiroptera then that that the esthete is not a spoil and is not incapable is false is not false. sent7: if the esthete is denominational that the wank is both not incapable and not non-seismological is false. sent8: the ganger does panic cowgirl. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not seismological is true the wank is denominational.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the esthete is not seismological is not wrong.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that it is not seismological.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the wank is denominational.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the wank is denominational is incorrect.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the esthete is seismological.; sent2 & sent8 -> int5: the cowgirl is a Chiroptera.; sent6 & int5 -> int6: that the esthete is not a kind of a spoil and is capable does not hold.; sent5 & int6 -> int7: that the esthete spoils is not incorrect.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the esthete is a spoil and it is not non-seismological.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if the wank is not denominational the esthete is a spoil and it is seismological. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is seismological. sent2: if the ganger does panic cowgirl then the cowgirl is a kind of a Chiroptera. sent3: The cowgirl does panic ganger. sent4: the fact that the esthete is a spoil and it is capable is not true. sent5: the esthete is a kind of a spoil if that it is not a kind of a spoil and it is not incapable does not hold. sent6: if the cowgirl is a Chiroptera then that that the esthete is not a spoil and is not incapable is false is not false. sent7: if the esthete is denominational that the wank is both not incapable and not non-seismological is false. sent8: the ganger does panic cowgirl. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not seismological is true the wank is denominational. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the esthete is not seismological is not wrong.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that it is not seismological.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the wank is denominational.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the wank is denominational is incorrect.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the esthete is seismological.; sent2 & sent8 -> int5: the cowgirl is a Chiroptera.; sent6 & int5 -> int6: that the esthete is not a kind of a spoil and is capable does not hold.; sent5 & int6 -> int7: that the esthete spoils is not incorrect.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the esthete is a spoil and it is not non-seismological.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__