the dragonfly is a sloe.
sent1: the collard does shampoo infrastructure or it is not a kind of a particulate or both. sent2: the lazuli is pyrographic if the blackwood is a kind of a Poronotus. sent3: if the lazuli does not expense lazuli then the dragonfly is a kind of a sloe. sent4: the dragonfly is not a atonicity but it is a particulate if it is not a sloe. sent5: if the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure then it is not fallible. sent6: if something does not shampoo infrastructure it is not fallible. sent7: that the lazuli is not fallible is not wrong. sent8: the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure if the collard is not particulate. sent9: the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure if the collard does shampoo infrastructure and/or is not a kind of a particulate. sent10: the blackwood is a Poronotus. sent11: the collard shampoos infrastructure and/or is a kind of a particulate. sent12: if something is pyrographic and does expense lazuli it is not a atonicity. sent13: if something does not shampoo infrastructure then it is non-fallible a atonicity.
sent2 & sent10 -> int1: the lazuli is pyrographic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lazuli expenses lazuli.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lazuli is pyrographic and it expenses lazuli.; sent12 -> int3: if the lazuli is pyrographic thing that does expense lazuli then it is not a atonicity.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the lazuli is not a atonicity is not wrong.; sent13 -> int5: the fact that the lazuli is infallible but it is a atonicity is not false if it does not shampoo infrastructure.; sent9 & sent1 -> int6: the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the lazuli is not fallible but it is a atonicity.; int7 -> int8: the lazuli is a kind of a atonicity.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: that the lazuli does not expense lazuli is true.; int10 & sent3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the dragonfly is a sloe. ; $context$ = sent1: the collard does shampoo infrastructure or it is not a kind of a particulate or both. sent2: the lazuli is pyrographic if the blackwood is a kind of a Poronotus. sent3: if the lazuli does not expense lazuli then the dragonfly is a kind of a sloe. sent4: the dragonfly is not a atonicity but it is a particulate if it is not a sloe. sent5: if the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure then it is not fallible. sent6: if something does not shampoo infrastructure it is not fallible. sent7: that the lazuli is not fallible is not wrong. sent8: the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure if the collard is not particulate. sent9: the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure if the collard does shampoo infrastructure and/or is not a kind of a particulate. sent10: the blackwood is a Poronotus. sent11: the collard shampoos infrastructure and/or is a kind of a particulate. sent12: if something is pyrographic and does expense lazuli it is not a atonicity. sent13: if something does not shampoo infrastructure then it is non-fallible a atonicity. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent10 -> int1: the lazuli is pyrographic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lazuli expenses lazuli.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lazuli is pyrographic and it expenses lazuli.; sent12 -> int3: if the lazuli is pyrographic thing that does expense lazuli then it is not a atonicity.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the lazuli is not a atonicity is not wrong.; sent13 -> int5: the fact that the lazuli is infallible but it is a atonicity is not false if it does not shampoo infrastructure.; sent9 & sent1 -> int6: the lazuli does not shampoo infrastructure.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the lazuli is not fallible but it is a atonicity.; int7 -> int8: the lazuli is a kind of a atonicity.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: that the lazuli does not expense lazuli is true.; int10 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__