there exists something such that if that it is not dishonorable is true it is a kind of a Priam that is nonphotosynthetic.
sent1: something is dishonorable if the fact that it does not escort semigloss and it does not begrudge is not correct. sent2: the floodgate is nonphotosynthetic if the ark is non-parotid and nonphotosynthetic. sent3: that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and begrudges is false. sent4: that something does not escort semigloss but it begrudges is not true if it is not a kind of a Priam. sent5: the ark is not parotid and it is not nonphotosynthetic if it is not a stiff. sent6: there exists something such that it is a sauropod. sent7: if the physa malingers the ark malingers. sent8: the fact that that the floodgate does not escort semigloss but it begrudges does not hold is not wrong if it is not a Priam. sent9: there exists something such that if it is nonphotosynthetic then it is parotid and escorts semigloss. sent10: if something does begrudge then it is dishonorable. sent11: that the ark is not a stiff is correct if that the physa is both not a sauropod and not a regeneration does not hold. sent12: that the physa is both not a sauropod and a regeneration is false. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not dishonorable it is a Priam. sent14: if there exists something such that that it is a sauropod hold then the fact that the physa is a sauropod but it is not a regeneration is incorrect. sent15: the ark is not nonphotosynthetic. sent16: that the physa is not a sauropod but it is a regeneration does not hold if there exists something such that it is a kind of a sauropod. sent17: the floodgate is a Priam and it is nonphotosynthetic if it is dishonorable. sent18: there exists something such that if it is dishonorable it is a kind of a Priam and it is nonphotosynthetic. sent19: the fact that the physa is not a sauropod and not a regeneration is wrong if something is a sauropod. sent20: the floodgate is dishonorable if it does begrudge. sent21: if the ark is not parotid but nonphotosynthetic the floodgate is nonphotosynthetic. sent22: if something is not a Priam then that it does not escort semigloss and does not begrudge does not hold. sent23: the fact that the physa is a sauropod but it is not a kind of a regeneration is not true. sent24: that the ark is not nonphotosynthetic hold if it is not a stiff. sent25: there exists something such that if it is a stiff then it begrudges and is a Priam.
sent22 -> int1: the fact that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and does not begrudge is wrong if it is not a Priam.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the floodgate is not a kind of a Priam.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the fact that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and it does not begrudge does not hold.; sent1 -> int3: if the fact that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and it does not begrudge is not correct it is dishonorable.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the floodgate is dishonorable is right.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the floodgate is not dishonorable.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the floodgate is a Priam.; sent6 & sent19 -> int7: the fact that the physa is not a sauropod and is not a regeneration does not hold.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: the ark is non-stiff.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the ark is both not parotid and not nonphotosynthetic.; sent2 & int9 -> int10: the floodgate is nonphotosynthetic.; int6 & int10 -> int11: the floodgate is a Priam and nonphotosynthetic.; [assump1] & int11 -> int12: the floodgate is a Priam and it is nonphotosynthetic if it is not dishonorable.; int12 -> hypothesis;
the ark does malinger.
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it is not dishonorable is true it is a kind of a Priam that is nonphotosynthetic. ; $context$ = sent1: something is dishonorable if the fact that it does not escort semigloss and it does not begrudge is not correct. sent2: the floodgate is nonphotosynthetic if the ark is non-parotid and nonphotosynthetic. sent3: that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and begrudges is false. sent4: that something does not escort semigloss but it begrudges is not true if it is not a kind of a Priam. sent5: the ark is not parotid and it is not nonphotosynthetic if it is not a stiff. sent6: there exists something such that it is a sauropod. sent7: if the physa malingers the ark malingers. sent8: the fact that that the floodgate does not escort semigloss but it begrudges does not hold is not wrong if it is not a Priam. sent9: there exists something such that if it is nonphotosynthetic then it is parotid and escorts semigloss. sent10: if something does begrudge then it is dishonorable. sent11: that the ark is not a stiff is correct if that the physa is both not a sauropod and not a regeneration does not hold. sent12: that the physa is both not a sauropod and a regeneration is false. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not dishonorable it is a Priam. sent14: if there exists something such that that it is a sauropod hold then the fact that the physa is a sauropod but it is not a regeneration is incorrect. sent15: the ark is not nonphotosynthetic. sent16: that the physa is not a sauropod but it is a regeneration does not hold if there exists something such that it is a kind of a sauropod. sent17: the floodgate is a Priam and it is nonphotosynthetic if it is dishonorable. sent18: there exists something such that if it is dishonorable it is a kind of a Priam and it is nonphotosynthetic. sent19: the fact that the physa is not a sauropod and not a regeneration is wrong if something is a sauropod. sent20: the floodgate is dishonorable if it does begrudge. sent21: if the ark is not parotid but nonphotosynthetic the floodgate is nonphotosynthetic. sent22: if something is not a Priam then that it does not escort semigloss and does not begrudge does not hold. sent23: the fact that the physa is a sauropod but it is not a kind of a regeneration is not true. sent24: that the ark is not nonphotosynthetic hold if it is not a stiff. sent25: there exists something such that if it is a stiff then it begrudges and is a Priam. ; $proof$ = 
sent22 -> int1: the fact that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and does not begrudge is wrong if it is not a Priam.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the floodgate is not a kind of a Priam.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the fact that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and it does not begrudge does not hold.; sent1 -> int3: if the fact that the floodgate does not escort semigloss and it does not begrudge is not correct it is dishonorable.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the floodgate is dishonorable is right.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the floodgate is not dishonorable.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the floodgate is a Priam.; sent6 & sent19 -> int7: the fact that the physa is not a sauropod and is not a regeneration does not hold.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: the ark is non-stiff.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the ark is both not parotid and not nonphotosynthetic.; sent2 & int9 -> int10: the floodgate is nonphotosynthetic.; int6 & int10 -> int11: the floodgate is a Priam and nonphotosynthetic.; [assump1] & int11 -> int12: the floodgate is a Priam and it is nonphotosynthetic if it is not dishonorable.; int12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__