the fact that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship that is not a kind of a forehanded does not hold.
sent1: that the rationalization is a laminectomy and does not browse road is incorrect. sent2: if something is a forehanded that the madrepore is both a autoinjector and not a one-upmanship does not hold. sent3: if the avocet is a kind of a autoinjector then the fact that the spironolactone configures islay hold. sent4: if there is something such that it is a autoinjector then the fact that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship and it is a kind of a forehanded is not true. sent5: that the madrepore is a kind of a one-upmanship but it is not a autoinjector does not hold. sent6: the fact that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship and it is a forehanded is false. sent7: the madrepore sickens. sent8: if something is a kind of a autoinjector that the madrepore is a kind of a one-upmanship and is not a forehanded does not hold. sent9: if something does not approve then that it browses spironolactone and it is not a caddie is not correct. sent10: if the avocet is not a kind of a one-upmanship then it is a autoinjector and forehanded. sent11: the madrepore is a kind of a autoinjector. sent12: that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship but it is not a forehanded does not hold if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a autoinjector is correct. sent13: something is virile and does not corset rationalization.
sent11 -> int1: there is something such that it is a autoinjector.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;
that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship but it is not forehanded is not false.
sent9 -> int2: if the fact that the avocet does not approve is not false then the fact that it browses spironolactone and does not caddie is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship that is not a kind of a forehanded does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the rationalization is a laminectomy and does not browse road is incorrect. sent2: if something is a forehanded that the madrepore is both a autoinjector and not a one-upmanship does not hold. sent3: if the avocet is a kind of a autoinjector then the fact that the spironolactone configures islay hold. sent4: if there is something such that it is a autoinjector then the fact that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship and it is a kind of a forehanded is not true. sent5: that the madrepore is a kind of a one-upmanship but it is not a autoinjector does not hold. sent6: the fact that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship and it is a forehanded is false. sent7: the madrepore sickens. sent8: if something is a kind of a autoinjector that the madrepore is a kind of a one-upmanship and is not a forehanded does not hold. sent9: if something does not approve then that it browses spironolactone and it is not a caddie is not correct. sent10: if the avocet is not a kind of a one-upmanship then it is a autoinjector and forehanded. sent11: the madrepore is a kind of a autoinjector. sent12: that the spironolactone is a one-upmanship but it is not a forehanded does not hold if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a autoinjector is correct. sent13: something is virile and does not corset rationalization. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> int1: there is something such that it is a autoinjector.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__