there is something such that if it is not olfactory then that it is a shamefacedness and not a restoration is not right.
sent1: the fact that something is a shamefacedness and it is a restoration is incorrect if it is non-olfactory. sent2: the fact that something is a Vichy but it does not ventilate luff is wrong if that it is not olfactory hold. sent3: that that the neencephalon is both thermionic and not an equatorial is not true hold if it is not a jampan. sent4: there is something such that if it does not dilate that it is a bottlenose and not a commercial does not hold. sent5: if something is not conclusive then the fact that it is a cardinalate and it is not a kind of a Microsporum is wrong. sent6: the fact that something is a shamefacedness but it is not a restoration is not right if that it is not olfactory hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it is olfactory that it is both a shamefacedness and not a restoration is wrong. sent8: the fact that something is a kind of olfactory thing that does not band reality is not true if it is not a existentialist. sent9: that that the thinker is both a shamefacedness and not a restoration hold is not true if it is olfactory. sent10: if the thinker is not olfactory then it is a shamefacedness and it is not a restoration. sent11: there is something such that if it is not intelligent that it does band obsolescence and it is not a bard is not correct. sent12: if the fact that the thinker is not olfactory is right the fact that it is a shamefacedness and it is a restoration is not correct.
sent6 -> int1: the fact that the thinker is a kind of a shamefacedness that is not a restoration is incorrect if it is not olfactory.; int1 -> hypothesis;
if the drawbridge is not existentialist then that it is olfactory and does not band reality is not correct.
sent8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not olfactory then that it is a shamefacedness and not a restoration is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is a shamefacedness and it is a restoration is incorrect if it is non-olfactory. sent2: the fact that something is a Vichy but it does not ventilate luff is wrong if that it is not olfactory hold. sent3: that that the neencephalon is both thermionic and not an equatorial is not true hold if it is not a jampan. sent4: there is something such that if it does not dilate that it is a bottlenose and not a commercial does not hold. sent5: if something is not conclusive then the fact that it is a cardinalate and it is not a kind of a Microsporum is wrong. sent6: the fact that something is a shamefacedness but it is not a restoration is not right if that it is not olfactory hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it is olfactory that it is both a shamefacedness and not a restoration is wrong. sent8: the fact that something is a kind of olfactory thing that does not band reality is not true if it is not a existentialist. sent9: that that the thinker is both a shamefacedness and not a restoration hold is not true if it is olfactory. sent10: if the thinker is not olfactory then it is a shamefacedness and it is not a restoration. sent11: there is something such that if it is not intelligent that it does band obsolescence and it is not a bard is not correct. sent12: if the fact that the thinker is not olfactory is right the fact that it is a shamefacedness and it is a restoration is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: the fact that the thinker is a kind of a shamefacedness that is not a restoration is incorrect if it is not olfactory.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__