the histocompatibility does not prod Muscadet.
sent1: if that something is both phagocytic and not palatoglossal is false that it is not phagocytic is true. sent2: if the epinephrine is not unhappy it is a kind of a turbine. sent3: the pudding-face is a turbine that is not a channel. sent4: if the epinephrine is phagocytic then the fact that the pudding-face is both a turbine and not a channel is not true. sent5: the adultery is a turbine but not a crystal. sent6: the histocompatibility is araneidal if the epinephrine is unhappy. sent7: the pudding-face is a kind of a turbine. sent8: if the fact that the lowerclassman relaces spadefish and does not housekeep impenitence is not right it does not relaces spadefish. sent9: if the pudding-face is not phagocytic then the epinephrine is unhappy thing that does not prod Muscadet. sent10: if the epinephrine is unhappy but it does not prod Muscadet then the histocompatibility prod Muscadet. sent11: the fact that the pudding-face is desirous and does not prod Muscadet does not hold. sent12: the fact that the epinephrine is araneidal is not wrong. sent13: the histocompatibility is araneidal thing that does not prod Muscadet if the epinephrine is unhappy. sent14: if the lowerclassman does not relace spadefish the papaw is measurable and is araneidal. sent15: the fact that the magnification is a kind of a stripe but it is not phagocytic does not hold. sent16: the epinephrine prods Muscadet. sent17: the histocompatibility is not utopian. sent18: the pudding-face is araneidal thing that does not prod Muscadet if the histocompatibility channels. sent19: the epinephrine is unhappy if the fact that it is non-phagocytic hold. sent20: if that something is araneidal but it is not palatoglossal is incorrect then it is not unhappy. sent21: the histocompatibility is araneidal. sent22: the histocompatibility is araneidal and not a turbine.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the epinephrine is phagocytic.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: that the pudding-face is both a turbine and not a channel is not correct.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the epinephrine is not phagocytic.; int3 & sent19 -> int4: the epinephrine is unhappy.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the histocompatibility is araneidal thing that does not prod Muscadet.; int5 -> hypothesis;
the histocompatibility does prod Muscadet.
sent20 -> int6: if the fact that the epinephrine is araneidal but it is not palatoglossal is wrong it is not unhappy.;
$hypothesis$ = the histocompatibility does not prod Muscadet. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is both phagocytic and not palatoglossal is false that it is not phagocytic is true. sent2: if the epinephrine is not unhappy it is a kind of a turbine. sent3: the pudding-face is a turbine that is not a channel. sent4: if the epinephrine is phagocytic then the fact that the pudding-face is both a turbine and not a channel is not true. sent5: the adultery is a turbine but not a crystal. sent6: the histocompatibility is araneidal if the epinephrine is unhappy. sent7: the pudding-face is a kind of a turbine. sent8: if the fact that the lowerclassman relaces spadefish and does not housekeep impenitence is not right it does not relaces spadefish. sent9: if the pudding-face is not phagocytic then the epinephrine is unhappy thing that does not prod Muscadet. sent10: if the epinephrine is unhappy but it does not prod Muscadet then the histocompatibility prod Muscadet. sent11: the fact that the pudding-face is desirous and does not prod Muscadet does not hold. sent12: the fact that the epinephrine is araneidal is not wrong. sent13: the histocompatibility is araneidal thing that does not prod Muscadet if the epinephrine is unhappy. sent14: if the lowerclassman does not relace spadefish the papaw is measurable and is araneidal. sent15: the fact that the magnification is a kind of a stripe but it is not phagocytic does not hold. sent16: the epinephrine prods Muscadet. sent17: the histocompatibility is not utopian. sent18: the pudding-face is araneidal thing that does not prod Muscadet if the histocompatibility channels. sent19: the epinephrine is unhappy if the fact that it is non-phagocytic hold. sent20: if that something is araneidal but it is not palatoglossal is incorrect then it is not unhappy. sent21: the histocompatibility is araneidal. sent22: the histocompatibility is araneidal and not a turbine. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the epinephrine is phagocytic.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: that the pudding-face is both a turbine and not a channel is not correct.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the epinephrine is not phagocytic.; int3 & sent19 -> int4: the epinephrine is unhappy.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the histocompatibility is araneidal thing that does not prod Muscadet.; int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__