the lighter is a sexed and is not affixal.
sent1: the mine is both Democratic and araneidal. sent2: the lighter is a kind of a sexed. sent3: that the lighter is fissionable but it does not expire saving is false if that it is cheliceral is right. sent4: the mine does not oscillate but it is a tapper if it is Democratic. sent5: if something does not collogue reassertion then it minstrels outthrust and it does not expire lemon. sent6: if the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it is penetrable and is not a sexed is incorrect is true that the lighter does sexed is correct. sent7: if something is not cheliceral then it does sex and it is not affixal. sent8: the fact that if something is not cheliceral and it is not penetrable then the fact that it is affixal is not wrong is right. sent9: that something is both penetrable and not a sexed does not hold if the fact that it oscillates is not false. sent10: the lighter is non-fissionable thing that does not expire saving. sent11: the gillie is not a sexed. sent12: if the lighter is not non-cheliceral that it is a kind of non-fissionable thing that does not expire saving does not hold. sent13: the fact that the manometer does oscillate hold if the mine does not oscillate but it is a tapper. sent14: that the jewfish is non-ametropic but not non-cheliceral is not right. sent15: the fact that the kerion is not cheliceral and it is not affixal is not right if there exists something such that it sexes. sent16: the fact that the lighter is a kind of a sexed and is not a kymograph is wrong. sent17: that the lighter is not fissionable is right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lighter is cheliceral.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: that the lighter is a kind of non-fissionable thing that does not expire saving is not true.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the lighter is not cheliceral.; sent7 -> int4: if that the lighter is not cheliceral is right it does sex and it is not affixal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;
the kerion is cheliceral.
sent9 -> int5: the fact that the manometer is penetrable but it is not a sexed does not hold if it oscillates.; sent1 -> int6: the mine is Democratic.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the mine does not oscillate but it is a tapper.; sent13 & int7 -> int8: the manometer oscillates.; int5 & int8 -> int9: that the manometer is not impenetrable and is not a kind of a sexed is incorrect.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that the fact that it is penetrable and it is not a sexed is not correct.; int10 & sent6 -> int11: the lighter does sex.; int11 -> int12: something does sex.; int12 & sent15 -> int13: the fact that the kerion is non-cheliceral thing that is not affixal does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the lighter is a sexed and is not affixal. ; $context$ = sent1: the mine is both Democratic and araneidal. sent2: the lighter is a kind of a sexed. sent3: that the lighter is fissionable but it does not expire saving is false if that it is cheliceral is right. sent4: the mine does not oscillate but it is a tapper if it is Democratic. sent5: if something does not collogue reassertion then it minstrels outthrust and it does not expire lemon. sent6: if the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it is penetrable and is not a sexed is incorrect is true that the lighter does sexed is correct. sent7: if something is not cheliceral then it does sex and it is not affixal. sent8: the fact that if something is not cheliceral and it is not penetrable then the fact that it is affixal is not wrong is right. sent9: that something is both penetrable and not a sexed does not hold if the fact that it oscillates is not false. sent10: the lighter is non-fissionable thing that does not expire saving. sent11: the gillie is not a sexed. sent12: if the lighter is not non-cheliceral that it is a kind of non-fissionable thing that does not expire saving does not hold. sent13: the fact that the manometer does oscillate hold if the mine does not oscillate but it is a tapper. sent14: that the jewfish is non-ametropic but not non-cheliceral is not right. sent15: the fact that the kerion is not cheliceral and it is not affixal is not right if there exists something such that it sexes. sent16: the fact that the lighter is a kind of a sexed and is not a kymograph is wrong. sent17: that the lighter is not fissionable is right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lighter is cheliceral.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: that the lighter is a kind of non-fissionable thing that does not expire saving is not true.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the lighter is not cheliceral.; sent7 -> int4: if that the lighter is not cheliceral is right it does sex and it is not affixal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__