the fact that the chimneysweeper is not an invader and is not unsystematic does not hold.
sent1: the fact that the beggarwoman astrogates does not hold. sent2: if that the beggarwoman does not blacklist sphere is right then the fact that it is unsystematic and it is not a enanthem is wrong. sent3: if the beggarwoman adolesces and/or does not blacklist sphere then the iceberg is not unsystematic. sent4: the opal is not an invader. sent5: the chimneysweeper astrogates. sent6: the sphere is a pindolol but it is not unsystematic. sent7: that the beggarwoman is an invader is not incorrect. sent8: if the iceberg is unsystematic then it does kennel. sent9: if either the iceberg astrogates or it is not unsystematic or both then the beggarwoman does not blacklist sphere. sent10: the beggarwoman does not blacklist neoexpressionism. sent11: the fact that the chimneysweeper is an invader but it does not astrogate is wrong if the beggarwoman does not astrogate. sent12: if the beggarwoman is an invader then the fact that the specimen is unsystematic and does not adolesce is false. sent13: if the fact that the beggarwoman does not astrogate is right that it is a enanthem and does not kennel is wrong. sent14: if the beggarwoman adolesces the iceberg is systematic. sent15: that the chimneysweeper is both not an invader and unsystematic is not correct. sent16: if the iceberg is not unsystematic that the chimneysweeper is not an invader and it is not unsystematic does not hold. sent17: the iceberg kennels. sent18: the billionaire does not blacklist sphere. sent19: if the beggarwoman blacklists sphere it is a enanthem. sent20: something that is not a enanthem blacklists sphere or is not a kennel or both. sent21: the chimneysweeper is a rechauffe. sent22: something is not a enanthem if the fact that it is unsystematic and it does not adolesce is incorrect. sent23: the fact that the chimneysweeper is a kind of an invader but it is not unsystematic does not hold. sent24: the beggarwoman is not a kind of a kennel.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the beggarwoman blacklists sphere.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the beggarwoman is a kind of a enanthem.; int1 & sent24 -> int2: the beggarwoman is a kind of a enanthem but it does not kennel.; sent13 & sent1 -> int3: that the beggarwoman is a kind of a enanthem but it is not a kennel does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the beggarwoman does not blacklist sphere.; int5 -> int6: either the beggarwoman adolesces or it does not blacklist sphere or both.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the iceberg is not unsystematic.; int7 & sent16 -> hypothesis;
the specimen is not a kennel.
sent20 -> int8: the specimen does blacklist sphere and/or it is not a kennel if it is not a enanthem.; sent22 -> int9: if the fact that the fact that the specimen is unsystematic and does not adolesce is wrong is not wrong it is not a enanthem.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the chimneysweeper is not an invader and is not unsystematic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the beggarwoman astrogates does not hold. sent2: if that the beggarwoman does not blacklist sphere is right then the fact that it is unsystematic and it is not a enanthem is wrong. sent3: if the beggarwoman adolesces and/or does not blacklist sphere then the iceberg is not unsystematic. sent4: the opal is not an invader. sent5: the chimneysweeper astrogates. sent6: the sphere is a pindolol but it is not unsystematic. sent7: that the beggarwoman is an invader is not incorrect. sent8: if the iceberg is unsystematic then it does kennel. sent9: if either the iceberg astrogates or it is not unsystematic or both then the beggarwoman does not blacklist sphere. sent10: the beggarwoman does not blacklist neoexpressionism. sent11: the fact that the chimneysweeper is an invader but it does not astrogate is wrong if the beggarwoman does not astrogate. sent12: if the beggarwoman is an invader then the fact that the specimen is unsystematic and does not adolesce is false. sent13: if the fact that the beggarwoman does not astrogate is right that it is a enanthem and does not kennel is wrong. sent14: if the beggarwoman adolesces the iceberg is systematic. sent15: that the chimneysweeper is both not an invader and unsystematic is not correct. sent16: if the iceberg is not unsystematic that the chimneysweeper is not an invader and it is not unsystematic does not hold. sent17: the iceberg kennels. sent18: the billionaire does not blacklist sphere. sent19: if the beggarwoman blacklists sphere it is a enanthem. sent20: something that is not a enanthem blacklists sphere or is not a kennel or both. sent21: the chimneysweeper is a rechauffe. sent22: something is not a enanthem if the fact that it is unsystematic and it does not adolesce is incorrect. sent23: the fact that the chimneysweeper is a kind of an invader but it is not unsystematic does not hold. sent24: the beggarwoman is not a kind of a kennel. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the beggarwoman blacklists sphere.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the beggarwoman is a kind of a enanthem.; int1 & sent24 -> int2: the beggarwoman is a kind of a enanthem but it does not kennel.; sent13 & sent1 -> int3: that the beggarwoman is a kind of a enanthem but it is not a kennel does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the beggarwoman does not blacklist sphere.; int5 -> int6: either the beggarwoman adolesces or it does not blacklist sphere or both.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the iceberg is not unsystematic.; int7 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__