if the abrogator does peregrinate then the wether is a slapstick.
sent1: if the fact that something is a kind of echoic thing that is a minimum is wrong it peregrinates. sent2: the fact that the abrogator is not a Pan but a bonduc is false if it is not nonechoic. sent3: if the abrogator does peregrinate then it is a slapstick. sent4: the abrogator is not nonechoic. sent5: something is a slapstick if it is a calcium. sent6: the fact that the wether is a calcium is correct if something that is a minimum peregrinates. sent7: something is a minimum if that it is not a Pan and it is a bonduc is not right.
sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the abrogator is not a Pan but it is a kind of a bonduc is not correct it is a minimum.; sent2 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the abrogator is not a Pan but it is a bonduc is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the abrogator is a kind of a minimum.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the abrogator does peregrinate.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the abrogator is a minimum and peregrinates.; int4 -> int5: something is a minimum and it peregrinates.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the wether is a calcium.; sent5 -> int7: the wether is a slapstick if it is a kind of a calcium.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the wether is a slapstick.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if the abrogator does peregrinate then the wether is a slapstick. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is a kind of echoic thing that is a minimum is wrong it peregrinates. sent2: the fact that the abrogator is not a Pan but a bonduc is false if it is not nonechoic. sent3: if the abrogator does peregrinate then it is a slapstick. sent4: the abrogator is not nonechoic. sent5: something is a slapstick if it is a calcium. sent6: the fact that the wether is a calcium is correct if something that is a minimum peregrinates. sent7: something is a minimum if that it is not a Pan and it is a bonduc is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the abrogator is not a Pan but it is a kind of a bonduc is not correct it is a minimum.; sent2 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the abrogator is not a Pan but it is a bonduc is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the abrogator is a kind of a minimum.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the abrogator does peregrinate.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the abrogator is a minimum and peregrinates.; int4 -> int5: something is a minimum and it peregrinates.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the wether is a calcium.; sent5 -> int7: the wether is a slapstick if it is a kind of a calcium.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the wether is a slapstick.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__