the newmarket is not intractable and is not amenorrheic.
sent1: that the cautery is a kind of a locomotive hold. sent2: the levanter approaches Hubel and it is a locomotive. sent3: the cautery is a myrmecophyte. sent4: if the stipendiary is not non-amenorrheic then the cautery is not a greyhound and does approach Hubel. sent5: if the stipendiary is not amenorrheic then the newmarket is not intractable and not amenorrheic. sent6: if the levanter does approach Hubel and is a locomotive then the cautery does not approach Hubel. sent7: the levanter is tractable. sent8: the cylinder is not a greyhound. sent9: if the cautery is not geophysical the fact that it does not housekeep bilabial and it is a locomotive is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stipendiary is amenorrheic.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the cautery is not a greyhound but it approaches Hubel.; int1 -> int2: the cautery does approach Hubel.; sent6 & sent2 -> int3: the cautery does not approach Hubel.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the stipendiary is not amenorrheic.; int5 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the fact that the newmarket is not intractable but non-amenorrheic is not incorrect does not hold.
$hypothesis$ = the newmarket is not intractable and is not amenorrheic. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cautery is a kind of a locomotive hold. sent2: the levanter approaches Hubel and it is a locomotive. sent3: the cautery is a myrmecophyte. sent4: if the stipendiary is not non-amenorrheic then the cautery is not a greyhound and does approach Hubel. sent5: if the stipendiary is not amenorrheic then the newmarket is not intractable and not amenorrheic. sent6: if the levanter does approach Hubel and is a locomotive then the cautery does not approach Hubel. sent7: the levanter is tractable. sent8: the cylinder is not a greyhound. sent9: if the cautery is not geophysical the fact that it does not housekeep bilabial and it is a locomotive is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stipendiary is amenorrheic.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the cautery is not a greyhound but it approaches Hubel.; int1 -> int2: the cautery does approach Hubel.; sent6 & sent2 -> int3: the cautery does not approach Hubel.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the stipendiary is not amenorrheic.; int5 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__