the fact that the atavist is not conspicuous is correct.
sent1: something is not inconspicuous if it is a volatile or it is not inconspicuous or both. sent2: the atavist is inconspicuous if the fact that the Lastex is not a kind of a sushi or it is a peripeteia or both is not true. sent3: the fact that the atavist does not compromise Caprimulgus hold if the Lastex does not ambush disciple. sent4: the Lastex is not a peripeteia. sent5: if the fact that the atavist is not a sushi and/or it does compromise Caprimulgus is incorrect then the fact that the Lastex is inconspicuous is not false. sent6: if the Lastex does not compromise Caprimulgus then it is not a peripeteia. sent7: The Caprimulgus does not compromise Lastex. sent8: something does not compromise Caprimulgus and is not a volatile if it is inconspicuous. sent9: the lemma compromises Caprimulgus if the Lastex does not compromises Caprimulgus and it is not a kind of a volatile. sent10: the fact that something does not ambush disciple is correct if it does not ambush canistel. sent11: that the prodigal is not a Townsend or inconspicuous or both is not right. sent12: the Lastex is a singles. sent13: the fact that either the atavist is not a kind of a peripeteia or it is a spinnaker or both is false if it does not ambush adulterant. sent14: if the Lastex does not compromise Caprimulgus then the fact that it is not a sushi and/or is a kind of a peripeteia is not true. sent15: the Lastex is not inconspicuous. sent16: the Lastex does not compromise Caprimulgus.
sent14 & sent16 -> int1: the fact that the Lastex is not a sushi and/or is a peripeteia is false.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;
the lemma does compromise Caprimulgus.
sent8 -> int2: if the Lastex is inconspicuous it does not compromise Caprimulgus and it is not a kind of a volatile.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the atavist is not conspicuous is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not inconspicuous if it is a volatile or it is not inconspicuous or both. sent2: the atavist is inconspicuous if the fact that the Lastex is not a kind of a sushi or it is a peripeteia or both is not true. sent3: the fact that the atavist does not compromise Caprimulgus hold if the Lastex does not ambush disciple. sent4: the Lastex is not a peripeteia. sent5: if the fact that the atavist is not a sushi and/or it does compromise Caprimulgus is incorrect then the fact that the Lastex is inconspicuous is not false. sent6: if the Lastex does not compromise Caprimulgus then it is not a peripeteia. sent7: The Caprimulgus does not compromise Lastex. sent8: something does not compromise Caprimulgus and is not a volatile if it is inconspicuous. sent9: the lemma compromises Caprimulgus if the Lastex does not compromises Caprimulgus and it is not a kind of a volatile. sent10: the fact that something does not ambush disciple is correct if it does not ambush canistel. sent11: that the prodigal is not a Townsend or inconspicuous or both is not right. sent12: the Lastex is a singles. sent13: the fact that either the atavist is not a kind of a peripeteia or it is a spinnaker or both is false if it does not ambush adulterant. sent14: if the Lastex does not compromise Caprimulgus then the fact that it is not a sushi and/or is a kind of a peripeteia is not true. sent15: the Lastex is not inconspicuous. sent16: the Lastex does not compromise Caprimulgus. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 & sent16 -> int1: the fact that the Lastex is not a sushi and/or is a peripeteia is false.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__