the parricide is micrometeoritic.
sent1: if the paregoric criticizes quill and is not accessional then the quill does blow. sent2: the fact that the paregoric does criticize quill but it does not bow encompassment is correct. sent3: if the paregoric is anaplastic that the parricide does not bow encompassment and is not a kind of a blow is not right. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that the fact that it criticizes quill and it is not accessional is true does not hold then the parricide is micrometeoritic. sent5: that something is not anaplastic but it is a suiting if it is a high-rise is right. sent6: the fact that the paregoric is anaplastic hold if the quill is a suiting. sent7: the fact that the acarid is non-anaplastic thing that suits does not hold if something does bow encompassment. sent8: if that something does not bow encompassment and it is not a blow is incorrect it is not micrometeoritic. sent9: the acarid is a high-rise. sent10: the schorl bows brain. sent11: something does suit if the fact that it is not a suit and it is not carpal does not hold. sent12: the schorl is not non-high-rise.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the paregoric criticizes quill but it is not accessional.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the quill is a blow.; sent5 -> int2: if the acarid is high-rise it is non-anaplastic thing that suits.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the acarid is not anaplastic and does suit.;
the parricide is not micrometeoritic.
sent8 -> int4: the parricide is not micrometeoritic if that it does not bow encompassment and does not blow is incorrect.; sent11 -> int5: the quill does suit if that it is both not a suit and not carpal is not correct.; sent10 & sent12 -> int6: the schorl bows brain and is high-rise.; int6 -> int7: something does bow brain and it is high-rise.;
$hypothesis$ = the parricide is micrometeoritic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the paregoric criticizes quill and is not accessional then the quill does blow. sent2: the fact that the paregoric does criticize quill but it does not bow encompassment is correct. sent3: if the paregoric is anaplastic that the parricide does not bow encompassment and is not a kind of a blow is not right. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that the fact that it criticizes quill and it is not accessional is true does not hold then the parricide is micrometeoritic. sent5: that something is not anaplastic but it is a suiting if it is a high-rise is right. sent6: the fact that the paregoric is anaplastic hold if the quill is a suiting. sent7: the fact that the acarid is non-anaplastic thing that suits does not hold if something does bow encompassment. sent8: if that something does not bow encompassment and it is not a blow is incorrect it is not micrometeoritic. sent9: the acarid is a high-rise. sent10: the schorl bows brain. sent11: something does suit if the fact that it is not a suit and it is not carpal does not hold. sent12: the schorl is not non-high-rise. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the paregoric criticizes quill but it is not accessional.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the quill is a blow.; sent5 -> int2: if the acarid is high-rise it is non-anaplastic thing that suits.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the acarid is not anaplastic and does suit.; __UNKNOWN__