the barmaid does not elaborate aged.
sent1: if something specializes then it does elaborate aged. sent2: the fact that the boutonniere is a kind of a seasickness and is a Bohemian does not hold. sent3: if the fact that something is not toeless and does specialize does not hold then it does not specialize. sent4: the boutonniere is not empirical. sent5: the weaver does not specialize. sent6: that the Freemason is not a OPEC and leases boutonniere is not true if it does specialize. sent7: if the Freemason does elaborate aged that the greens is non-toeless thing that does specialize is incorrect. sent8: if there is something such that that it is non-Bohemian and is prolate is wrong then the Freemason is not prolate. sent9: something is non-Bohemian thing that does not impale if it is a pilocarpine. sent10: the barmaid does not elaborate aged if the weaver does not specialize and is not prolate. sent11: something is not a cupel and does not axe Castroism if it does not specialize. sent12: the weaver does not specialize and is not prolate if the Freemason does not specialize. sent13: the weaver is not a pilocarpine if that it is a kind of a halyard and it is a Bernhardt is right. sent14: the barmaid does not elaborate aged if the weaver does specialize and is not prolate. sent15: the quicklime is not toeless if there is something such that the fact that it is not a OPEC and it leases boutonniere is not right. sent16: the weaver does not specialize if the Freemason does not specialize. sent17: the Freemason elaborates aged if there is something such that it is a seasickness and is not prolate. sent18: the quicklime is both a seasickness and not prolate if there are Bohemian things. sent19: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a seasickness and is a Bohemian is not right the quicklime is toeless. sent20: that the quicklime is not Bohemian and is prolate is incorrect if there is something such that it is a seasickness. sent21: the weaver is a halyard and is a Bernhardt. sent22: that the Freemason is a OPEC and it does lease boutonniere does not hold. sent23: if something is not a pilocarpine it is a seasickness and it does not impale. sent24: something is not a OPEC and does lease boutonniere. sent25: the weaver is a Bohemian if the barmaid is Bohemian and it does not impale. sent26: if something is a OPEC the quicklime is not toeless.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Freemason does specialize.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that that the Freemason is not a OPEC but it leases boutonniere is wrong is not false.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a OPEC and leases boutonniere does not hold.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the quicklime is not toeless.; sent2 -> int4: there exists something such that that it is a seasickness and it is a Bohemian is not right.; int4 & sent19 -> int5: the quicklime is toeless.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the Freemason does not specialize.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the weaver does not specialize and it is not prolate.; int8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the barmaid does elaborate aged.
sent1 -> int9: the barmaid does elaborate aged if it does specialize.; sent23 -> int10: the weaver is a kind of a seasickness and does not impale if it is not a pilocarpine.; sent13 & sent21 -> int11: the weaver is not a pilocarpine.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the weaver is a seasickness and does not impale.; int12 -> int13: the weaver is a seasickness.; int13 -> int14: there exists something such that it is a kind of a seasickness.; int14 & sent20 -> int15: the fact that the quicklime is not a Bohemian but it is prolate does not hold.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Bohemian and it is prolate is false.; int16 & sent8 -> int17: the Freemason is not prolate.; int17 -> int18: the Freemason is not prolate and/or is toeless.; int18 -> int19: there is something such that it is not prolate and/or it is toeless.;
$hypothesis$ = the barmaid does not elaborate aged. ; $context$ = sent1: if something specializes then it does elaborate aged. sent2: the fact that the boutonniere is a kind of a seasickness and is a Bohemian does not hold. sent3: if the fact that something is not toeless and does specialize does not hold then it does not specialize. sent4: the boutonniere is not empirical. sent5: the weaver does not specialize. sent6: that the Freemason is not a OPEC and leases boutonniere is not true if it does specialize. sent7: if the Freemason does elaborate aged that the greens is non-toeless thing that does specialize is incorrect. sent8: if there is something such that that it is non-Bohemian and is prolate is wrong then the Freemason is not prolate. sent9: something is non-Bohemian thing that does not impale if it is a pilocarpine. sent10: the barmaid does not elaborate aged if the weaver does not specialize and is not prolate. sent11: something is not a cupel and does not axe Castroism if it does not specialize. sent12: the weaver does not specialize and is not prolate if the Freemason does not specialize. sent13: the weaver is not a pilocarpine if that it is a kind of a halyard and it is a Bernhardt is right. sent14: the barmaid does not elaborate aged if the weaver does specialize and is not prolate. sent15: the quicklime is not toeless if there is something such that the fact that it is not a OPEC and it leases boutonniere is not right. sent16: the weaver does not specialize if the Freemason does not specialize. sent17: the Freemason elaborates aged if there is something such that it is a seasickness and is not prolate. sent18: the quicklime is both a seasickness and not prolate if there are Bohemian things. sent19: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a seasickness and is a Bohemian is not right the quicklime is toeless. sent20: that the quicklime is not Bohemian and is prolate is incorrect if there is something such that it is a seasickness. sent21: the weaver is a halyard and is a Bernhardt. sent22: that the Freemason is a OPEC and it does lease boutonniere does not hold. sent23: if something is not a pilocarpine it is a seasickness and it does not impale. sent24: something is not a OPEC and does lease boutonniere. sent25: the weaver is a Bohemian if the barmaid is Bohemian and it does not impale. sent26: if something is a OPEC the quicklime is not toeless. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Freemason does specialize.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that that the Freemason is not a OPEC but it leases boutonniere is wrong is not false.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a OPEC and leases boutonniere does not hold.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the quicklime is not toeless.; sent2 -> int4: there exists something such that that it is a seasickness and it is a Bohemian is not right.; int4 & sent19 -> int5: the quicklime is toeless.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the Freemason does not specialize.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the weaver does not specialize and it is not prolate.; int8 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__