there is something such that if it is condylar and is empiric then it does not overcloud.
sent1: if the Tudor is condylar thing that is empiric then it does not overcloud. sent2: the Tudor does overcloud if it is condylar and it is empiric. sent3: the Tudor is non-empiric if it is hairless and it does astringe fleetness. sent4: there is something such that if it is a jird and is a kind of a squawk it does redouble. sent5: the Tudor is a scribe if it does wander and overclouds. sent6: there is something such that if it is condylar and empiric it does overcloud. sent7: if something that is a kind of a harbor eyes the fact that it is implausible is not wrong. sent8: the fact that the Tudor does not rabbet serfdom if the Tudor is a kind of a weighted that is condylar is not false.
sent1 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is a harbor and it does eye it is not plausible.
sent7 -> int1: if the gill harbors and is a kind of an eyes then it is not plausible.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is condylar and is empiric then it does not overcloud. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Tudor is condylar thing that is empiric then it does not overcloud. sent2: the Tudor does overcloud if it is condylar and it is empiric. sent3: the Tudor is non-empiric if it is hairless and it does astringe fleetness. sent4: there is something such that if it is a jird and is a kind of a squawk it does redouble. sent5: the Tudor is a scribe if it does wander and overclouds. sent6: there is something such that if it is condylar and empiric it does overcloud. sent7: if something that is a kind of a harbor eyes the fact that it is implausible is not wrong. sent8: the fact that the Tudor does not rabbet serfdom if the Tudor is a kind of a weighted that is condylar is not false. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__