the munj is not a chichipe.
sent1: if the munj is a chichipe the fact that the quarter is a bronco hold. sent2: if that the quoits is not an apostrophe is correct then the fact that it is not a cisco and it results quoits is not right. sent3: if the munj is a kind of a chichipe then that the fact that the quarter is not a kind of a bronco and/or it drizzles interplay is not wrong is not correct. sent4: if the megestrol is not an apostrophe but it is attributable then the quoits is not an apostrophe. sent5: the munj is a chichipe and/or is a bronco. sent6: the quarter is a kind of a bronco and/or does drizzle interplay if it is not a fender-bender. sent7: something that is not myrmecophytic is a kind of a fender-bender and cranes. sent8: the quarter is a bronco. sent9: if the quarter is not a kind of a fender-bender it is not a bronco and/or it does drizzle interplay. sent10: the quarter is a kind of a bronco or it does drizzle interplay or both. sent11: the quarter is not a fender-bender. sent12: everything reflects megestrol and is a kind of a clubfoot. sent13: if the quarter is a fender-bender the munj is a kind of a chichipe. sent14: if the barrator is a kind of a clubfoot then the megestrol is not a kind of an apostrophe but it is attributable.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the munj is a chichipe.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the quarter is not a bronco and/or drizzles interplay is not correct.; sent9 & sent11 -> int2: the quarter is not a bronco or drizzles interplay or both.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the munj is a kind of a chichipe.
sent7 -> int4: if the quarter is not myrmecophytic it is a kind of a fender-bender and it cranes.; sent12 -> int5: the barrator does reflect megestrol and is a clubfoot.; int5 -> int6: the barrator is a clubfoot.; sent14 & int6 -> int7: the megestrol is both not an apostrophe and attributable.; sent4 & int7 -> int8: the quoits is not an apostrophe.; sent2 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the quoits is not a cisco and does result quoits is not correct.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that the fact that it is not a cisco and results quoits is false.;
$hypothesis$ = the munj is not a chichipe. ; $context$ = sent1: if the munj is a chichipe the fact that the quarter is a bronco hold. sent2: if that the quoits is not an apostrophe is correct then the fact that it is not a cisco and it results quoits is not right. sent3: if the munj is a kind of a chichipe then that the fact that the quarter is not a kind of a bronco and/or it drizzles interplay is not wrong is not correct. sent4: if the megestrol is not an apostrophe but it is attributable then the quoits is not an apostrophe. sent5: the munj is a chichipe and/or is a bronco. sent6: the quarter is a kind of a bronco and/or does drizzle interplay if it is not a fender-bender. sent7: something that is not myrmecophytic is a kind of a fender-bender and cranes. sent8: the quarter is a bronco. sent9: if the quarter is not a kind of a fender-bender it is not a bronco and/or it does drizzle interplay. sent10: the quarter is a kind of a bronco or it does drizzle interplay or both. sent11: the quarter is not a fender-bender. sent12: everything reflects megestrol and is a kind of a clubfoot. sent13: if the quarter is a fender-bender the munj is a kind of a chichipe. sent14: if the barrator is a kind of a clubfoot then the megestrol is not a kind of an apostrophe but it is attributable. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the munj is a chichipe.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the quarter is not a bronco and/or drizzles interplay is not correct.; sent9 & sent11 -> int2: the quarter is not a bronco or drizzles interplay or both.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__