the coxcomb does not metabolize Johnston.
sent1: if the flannel is a perspiration the fact that the scolopendrium is both not an aerial and not a perspiration is wrong. sent2: if the fact that the ready-made is a cobblers and/or does scrape is not right the flannel is a kind of a perspiration. sent3: the ready-made is not inexpressible if the fact that it is not a Chironomidae and it scrapes is false. sent4: if something is a perspiration then it does not metabolize hyson. sent5: if the ready-made is not inexpressible then the scolopendrium does metabolize hyson and is a kind of a concessionaire. sent6: that something is either phenomenal or not a cobblers or both does not hold if it metabolizes beluga. sent7: the fact that the high is Saharan and it is a Chironomidae does not hold. sent8: something does not metabolize hyson if the fact that it is not an aerial and it is not a perspiration is not correct. sent9: the ready-made is a scrape and is a concessionaire. sent10: the ready-made is a kind of a cobblers and is a kind of a Chironomidae if the fact that the scolopendrium is not a kind of a perspiration is correct. sent11: something is a kind of a cobblers if it metabolizes beluga. sent12: something metabolizes Johnston and does metabolize beluga if it is not a perspiration. sent13: that the ready-made is not a Chironomidae but it scrapes is not right. sent14: the fact that if the fact that the garambulla is phenomenal and/or it is not a cobblers is wrong the flannel is a perspiration is right. sent15: if that the garambulla does not metabolize beluga hold the coxcomb does not metabolize Johnston. sent16: that the ready-made is not a kind of a scrape and it is not a cobblers is incorrect if the fact that the garambulla is a cobblers is true. sent17: if the flannel metabolizes hyson it is a kind of a perspiration.
sent6 -> int1: if the garambulla metabolizes beluga the fact that it is either phenomenal or not a cobblers or both does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the garambulla metabolizes beluga.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that either the garambulla is phenomenal or it is not a cobblers or both is incorrect.; int2 & sent14 -> int3: the flannel is a perspiration.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the fact that the scolopendrium is a kind of non-aerial thing that is not a perspiration is incorrect.; sent8 -> int5: if that the scolopendrium is both not aerial and not a perspiration is incorrect then it does not metabolize hyson.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the scolopendrium does not metabolize hyson.; sent3 & sent13 -> int7: the ready-made is not inexpressible.; sent5 & int7 -> int8: the scolopendrium does metabolize hyson and it is a kind of a concessionaire.; int8 -> int9: the scolopendrium metabolizes hyson.; int6 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: that the garambulla does not metabolize beluga hold.; int11 & sent15 -> hypothesis;
the coxcomb metabolizes Johnston.
sent12 -> int12: if the coxcomb is not a perspiration then it does metabolize Johnston and does metabolize beluga.;
$hypothesis$ = the coxcomb does not metabolize Johnston. ; $context$ = sent1: if the flannel is a perspiration the fact that the scolopendrium is both not an aerial and not a perspiration is wrong. sent2: if the fact that the ready-made is a cobblers and/or does scrape is not right the flannel is a kind of a perspiration. sent3: the ready-made is not inexpressible if the fact that it is not a Chironomidae and it scrapes is false. sent4: if something is a perspiration then it does not metabolize hyson. sent5: if the ready-made is not inexpressible then the scolopendrium does metabolize hyson and is a kind of a concessionaire. sent6: that something is either phenomenal or not a cobblers or both does not hold if it metabolizes beluga. sent7: the fact that the high is Saharan and it is a Chironomidae does not hold. sent8: something does not metabolize hyson if the fact that it is not an aerial and it is not a perspiration is not correct. sent9: the ready-made is a scrape and is a concessionaire. sent10: the ready-made is a kind of a cobblers and is a kind of a Chironomidae if the fact that the scolopendrium is not a kind of a perspiration is correct. sent11: something is a kind of a cobblers if it metabolizes beluga. sent12: something metabolizes Johnston and does metabolize beluga if it is not a perspiration. sent13: that the ready-made is not a Chironomidae but it scrapes is not right. sent14: the fact that if the fact that the garambulla is phenomenal and/or it is not a cobblers is wrong the flannel is a perspiration is right. sent15: if that the garambulla does not metabolize beluga hold the coxcomb does not metabolize Johnston. sent16: that the ready-made is not a kind of a scrape and it is not a cobblers is incorrect if the fact that the garambulla is a cobblers is true. sent17: if the flannel metabolizes hyson it is a kind of a perspiration. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: if the garambulla metabolizes beluga the fact that it is either phenomenal or not a cobblers or both does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the garambulla metabolizes beluga.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that either the garambulla is phenomenal or it is not a cobblers or both is incorrect.; int2 & sent14 -> int3: the flannel is a perspiration.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the fact that the scolopendrium is a kind of non-aerial thing that is not a perspiration is incorrect.; sent8 -> int5: if that the scolopendrium is both not aerial and not a perspiration is incorrect then it does not metabolize hyson.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the scolopendrium does not metabolize hyson.; sent3 & sent13 -> int7: the ready-made is not inexpressible.; sent5 & int7 -> int8: the scolopendrium does metabolize hyson and it is a kind of a concessionaire.; int8 -> int9: the scolopendrium metabolizes hyson.; int6 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: that the garambulla does not metabolize beluga hold.; int11 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__