the isoproterenol is avuncular.
sent1: if that either the earner is not a amenability or it is avuncular or both is incorrect then the isoproterenol is avuncular. sent2: the fact that something is not avuncular and it does not subside cornerstone does not hold if it is not a chenille. sent3: if the earner is a chenille it is not proactive. sent4: if the ascus is proactive the earner is proactive. sent5: if the fact that the earner is not a Menotyphla and it does not guard fluorescein is false then the isoproterenol is avuncular. sent6: that something is not a kind of a Menotyphla and does not guard fluorescein is not true if it is not a kind of a amenability. sent7: if the earner is a amenability and/or it is a chenille then that it is proactive does not hold. sent8: that the earner is a kind of a Menotyphla but it does not guard fluorescein is wrong if that it is not a kind of a amenability hold. sent9: that the ascus is non-proactive thing that does subside cornerstone is not correct. sent10: if the ascus does not guard fluorescein then the earner is a kind of non-proactive a Menotyphla. sent11: the fact that the ascus is proactive and it does subside cornerstone does not hold. sent12: if that the ascus is not proactive but it does subside cornerstone is not true then the earner is proactive. sent13: if something is not proactive but a Menotyphla then it is not a chenille.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the earner is a amenability.; assump1 -> int1: the earner is a kind of a amenability and/or it is a kind of a chenille.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the earner is not proactive is not wrong.; sent12 & sent9 -> int3: the earner is proactive.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the earner is not a kind of a amenability.; sent6 -> int6: if the earner is not a amenability the fact that it is not a kind of a Menotyphla and does not guard fluorescein is false.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that that the earner is not a Menotyphla and it does not guard fluorescein is correct does not hold.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the isoproterenol is not avuncular.
sent13 -> int8: the earner is not a kind of a chenille if it is not proactive but a Menotyphla.;
$hypothesis$ = the isoproterenol is avuncular. ; $context$ = sent1: if that either the earner is not a amenability or it is avuncular or both is incorrect then the isoproterenol is avuncular. sent2: the fact that something is not avuncular and it does not subside cornerstone does not hold if it is not a chenille. sent3: if the earner is a chenille it is not proactive. sent4: if the ascus is proactive the earner is proactive. sent5: if the fact that the earner is not a Menotyphla and it does not guard fluorescein is false then the isoproterenol is avuncular. sent6: that something is not a kind of a Menotyphla and does not guard fluorescein is not true if it is not a kind of a amenability. sent7: if the earner is a amenability and/or it is a chenille then that it is proactive does not hold. sent8: that the earner is a kind of a Menotyphla but it does not guard fluorescein is wrong if that it is not a kind of a amenability hold. sent9: that the ascus is non-proactive thing that does subside cornerstone is not correct. sent10: if the ascus does not guard fluorescein then the earner is a kind of non-proactive a Menotyphla. sent11: the fact that the ascus is proactive and it does subside cornerstone does not hold. sent12: if that the ascus is not proactive but it does subside cornerstone is not true then the earner is proactive. sent13: if something is not proactive but a Menotyphla then it is not a chenille. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the earner is a amenability.; assump1 -> int1: the earner is a kind of a amenability and/or it is a kind of a chenille.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the earner is not proactive is not wrong.; sent12 & sent9 -> int3: the earner is proactive.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the earner is not a kind of a amenability.; sent6 -> int6: if the earner is not a amenability the fact that it is not a kind of a Menotyphla and does not guard fluorescein is false.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that that the earner is not a Menotyphla and it does not guard fluorescein is correct does not hold.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__