the sprat does not exsiccate consensus and it is not a hue.
sent1: if something that is not anarchistic is seminal it does rap dither. sent2: if the fact that the nakedwood raps dither but it is not a kind of a aerolite is not correct then the hammock is a aerolite. sent3: something is not non-seminal if it does not hue and it is anarchistic. sent4: if the fact that the nakedwood is seminal is not false the hammock is not seminal. sent5: the sprat does not rap scouring and is a kind of a chance if the hammock is a kind of a aerolite. sent6: the nakedwood is seminal. sent7: something does exsiccate consensus if it is seminal. sent8: something exsiccates consensus and is a aerolite. sent9: something is a trismus but it is not bladdery if the fact that it is a kind of a psychedelia is not incorrect. sent10: there is something such that it is not bladdery. sent11: the spotlight is both not a hue and anarchistic if the myelin is a trismus. sent12: if something that does exsiccate consensus is not a aerolite the hammock is not seminal. sent13: the myelin is a psychedelia. sent14: the sprat is not a aerolite and does rap dither. sent15: that if there is something such that it is not bladdery then the nakedwood is not a trismus is correct.
sent14 -> int1: the sprat is not a aerolite.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sprat does exsiccate consensus.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the sprat exsiccates consensus and is not a kind of a aerolite.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that it exsiccates consensus and is not a aerolite.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the hammock is not seminal is not wrong.; sent4 & sent6 -> int5: that the hammock is seminal is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the sprat does not exsiccate consensus is not wrong.;
the sprat does not rap scouring but it does chance.
sent7 -> int8: if the spotlight is seminal then it does exsiccate consensus.; sent3 -> int9: if the spotlight is not a hue but it is anarchistic then that that it is not seminal is wrong is correct.; sent9 -> int10: the myelin is a trismus and is not bladdery if it is a kind of a psychedelia.; int10 & sent13 -> int11: the fact that the myelin is a trismus but it is not bladdery is right.; int11 -> int12: the myelin is a trismus.; sent11 & int12 -> int13: the spotlight is not a hue but anarchistic.; int9 & int13 -> int14: the spotlight is seminal.; int8 & int14 -> int15: the spotlight exsiccates consensus.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that it exsiccates consensus.;
$hypothesis$ = the sprat does not exsiccate consensus and it is not a hue. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is not anarchistic is seminal it does rap dither. sent2: if the fact that the nakedwood raps dither but it is not a kind of a aerolite is not correct then the hammock is a aerolite. sent3: something is not non-seminal if it does not hue and it is anarchistic. sent4: if the fact that the nakedwood is seminal is not false the hammock is not seminal. sent5: the sprat does not rap scouring and is a kind of a chance if the hammock is a kind of a aerolite. sent6: the nakedwood is seminal. sent7: something does exsiccate consensus if it is seminal. sent8: something exsiccates consensus and is a aerolite. sent9: something is a trismus but it is not bladdery if the fact that it is a kind of a psychedelia is not incorrect. sent10: there is something such that it is not bladdery. sent11: the spotlight is both not a hue and anarchistic if the myelin is a trismus. sent12: if something that does exsiccate consensus is not a aerolite the hammock is not seminal. sent13: the myelin is a psychedelia. sent14: the sprat is not a aerolite and does rap dither. sent15: that if there is something such that it is not bladdery then the nakedwood is not a trismus is correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: the sprat is not a aerolite.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sprat does exsiccate consensus.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the sprat exsiccates consensus and is not a kind of a aerolite.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that it exsiccates consensus and is not a aerolite.; int3 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the hammock is not seminal is not wrong.; sent4 & sent6 -> int5: that the hammock is seminal is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the sprat does not exsiccate consensus is not wrong.; __UNKNOWN__