that the iodide is not a contributor and does regenerate is not right if the Aertex is unfavorable.
sent1: the steward is not regenerate if there is something such that it is both a frogfish and unfavorable. sent2: if something that regenerates is a contributor the steward is not a fix. sent3: the iodide is both not a contributor and regenerate if the Aertex is unfavorable. sent4: if the wordfinder is a fix the fact that the iodide is not regenerate but it is unfavorable is wrong. sent5: that the iodide is a contributor and regenerate is incorrect. sent6: that the steward is regenerate and is not a lev does not hold. sent7: the iodide is not a kind of a contributor but it regenerates if the steward does not regenerates. sent8: that the iodide is a frogfish and is not regenerate is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the fact that the iodide is both not a contributor and regenerate does not hold is right if the steward is not regenerate. sent10: the Aertex is not a kind of a frogfish if there exists something such that it is regenerate and it is unfavorable. sent11: that the wordfinder is a kind of a fix that is not a lev is not true. sent12: something is unfavorable. sent13: the iodide is not a kind of a contributor but it is regenerate. sent14: the wordfinder does sicken shinny. sent15: the wordfinder bars beanbag. sent16: if that that the wordfinder is a fix and is not a lev is not correct hold then the Aertex is a frogfish. sent17: there exists something such that it is a frogfish. sent18: if that the wordfinder does not fix hold then the Aertex is a kind of a frogfish. sent19: if the iodide is unregenerate then that the steward is not a fix but unregenerate is not correct. sent20: if the Aertex is unfavorable then the fact that the iodide is a kind of a contributor and it regenerates is wrong. sent21: that if the steward is not regenerate then the fact that the iodide is a contributor and it regenerate is wrong is correct.
sent16 & sent11 -> int1: the Aertex is a frogfish.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Aertex is unfavorable.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the Aertex is a kind of a frogfish and it is unfavorable.; int2 -> int3: something is a frogfish and it is unfavorable.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the steward does not regenerate.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the iodide is not a contributor and regenerates is wrong.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that the iodide is not a contributor and does regenerate is not right if the Aertex is unfavorable. ; $context$ = sent1: the steward is not regenerate if there is something such that it is both a frogfish and unfavorable. sent2: if something that regenerates is a contributor the steward is not a fix. sent3: the iodide is both not a contributor and regenerate if the Aertex is unfavorable. sent4: if the wordfinder is a fix the fact that the iodide is not regenerate but it is unfavorable is wrong. sent5: that the iodide is a contributor and regenerate is incorrect. sent6: that the steward is regenerate and is not a lev does not hold. sent7: the iodide is not a kind of a contributor but it regenerates if the steward does not regenerates. sent8: that the iodide is a frogfish and is not regenerate is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the fact that the iodide is both not a contributor and regenerate does not hold is right if the steward is not regenerate. sent10: the Aertex is not a kind of a frogfish if there exists something such that it is regenerate and it is unfavorable. sent11: that the wordfinder is a kind of a fix that is not a lev is not true. sent12: something is unfavorable. sent13: the iodide is not a kind of a contributor but it is regenerate. sent14: the wordfinder does sicken shinny. sent15: the wordfinder bars beanbag. sent16: if that that the wordfinder is a fix and is not a lev is not correct hold then the Aertex is a frogfish. sent17: there exists something such that it is a frogfish. sent18: if that the wordfinder does not fix hold then the Aertex is a kind of a frogfish. sent19: if the iodide is unregenerate then that the steward is not a fix but unregenerate is not correct. sent20: if the Aertex is unfavorable then the fact that the iodide is a kind of a contributor and it regenerates is wrong. sent21: that if the steward is not regenerate then the fact that the iodide is a contributor and it regenerate is wrong is correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent16 & sent11 -> int1: the Aertex is a frogfish.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Aertex is unfavorable.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the Aertex is a kind of a frogfish and it is unfavorable.; int2 -> int3: something is a frogfish and it is unfavorable.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the steward does not regenerate.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the iodide is not a contributor and regenerates is wrong.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__