the decoration either is a megadeath or is incredulous or both.
sent1: if there exists something such that the fact that it does lunch Beveridge and does not lunch postmodernism is wrong then the fact that the decoration does not Simonize decoration is true. sent2: if something does not Simonize decoration then it does Simonize nympholept. sent3: if the funicle lunches Beveridge but it does not lunch postmodernism it is a kudu. sent4: something that is a kudu is a miniver. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it criticizes and is not fleshy is wrong the funicle is not a miniver. sent6: there is something such that that it does criticize and is not fleshy is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the funicle does lunch Beveridge and does not lunch postmodernism.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the funicle is a kudu.; sent4 -> int2: if the funicle is a kind of a kudu then it is a miniver.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the funicle is a kind of a miniver.; sent6 & sent5 -> int4: the funicle is not a miniver.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the funicle lunches Beveridge and does not lunch postmodernism does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it lunches Beveridge and it does not lunch postmodernism does not hold.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: the decoration does not Simonize decoration.; sent2 -> int9: if the decoration does not Simonize decoration it Simonizes nympholept.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the decoration does Simonize nympholept.;
$hypothesis$ = the decoration either is a megadeath or is incredulous or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that the fact that it does lunch Beveridge and does not lunch postmodernism is wrong then the fact that the decoration does not Simonize decoration is true. sent2: if something does not Simonize decoration then it does Simonize nympholept. sent3: if the funicle lunches Beveridge but it does not lunch postmodernism it is a kudu. sent4: something that is a kudu is a miniver. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it criticizes and is not fleshy is wrong the funicle is not a miniver. sent6: there is something such that that it does criticize and is not fleshy is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the funicle does lunch Beveridge and does not lunch postmodernism.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the funicle is a kudu.; sent4 -> int2: if the funicle is a kind of a kudu then it is a miniver.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the funicle is a kind of a miniver.; sent6 & sent5 -> int4: the funicle is not a miniver.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the funicle lunches Beveridge and does not lunch postmodernism does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it lunches Beveridge and it does not lunch postmodernism does not hold.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: the decoration does not Simonize decoration.; sent2 -> int9: if the decoration does not Simonize decoration it Simonizes nympholept.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the decoration does Simonize nympholept.; __UNKNOWN__