if the semanticist is not blastoporal then that the tassel is a kind of a plumpness that does vociferate is wrong.
sent1: the tassel is not symmetrical and does vociferate. sent2: if that something does not crave but it is a holmium does not hold then it is symmetrical. sent3: something is symmetrical if it is not a holmium. sent4: the hummus does crave. sent5: a symmetrical thing is blastoporal. sent6: if the fact that something does not vociferate and is not non-blastoporal does not hold it is a kind of a holmium. sent7: if the semanticist does not vociferate then the fact that the tassel is a plumpness and it does vociferate does not hold.
sent2 -> int1: the semanticist is symmetrical if the fact that it does not crave and it is a holmium is incorrect.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the semanticist does not crave and is a holmium is not right.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the semanticist is symmetrical.; sent5 -> int3: the semanticist is blastoporal if it is symmetrical.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the semanticist is not non-blastoporal hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the semanticist is not blastoporal.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the semanticist does not crave and is a kind of a holmium.;
$hypothesis$ = if the semanticist is not blastoporal then that the tassel is a kind of a plumpness that does vociferate is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the tassel is not symmetrical and does vociferate. sent2: if that something does not crave but it is a holmium does not hold then it is symmetrical. sent3: something is symmetrical if it is not a holmium. sent4: the hummus does crave. sent5: a symmetrical thing is blastoporal. sent6: if the fact that something does not vociferate and is not non-blastoporal does not hold it is a kind of a holmium. sent7: if the semanticist does not vociferate then the fact that the tassel is a plumpness and it does vociferate does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the semanticist is symmetrical if the fact that it does not crave and it is a holmium is incorrect.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the semanticist does not crave and is a holmium is not right.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the semanticist is symmetrical.; sent5 -> int3: the semanticist is blastoporal if it is symmetrical.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the semanticist is not non-blastoporal hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the semanticist is not blastoporal.; int4 & assump1 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the semanticist does not crave and is a kind of a holmium.; __UNKNOWN__