there is something such that if it is non-iritic then either it does not abandon Feynman or it is a ultramontane or both.
sent1: something is iritic if it does not abandon Feynman and/or is a ultramontane. sent2: if that something does not abandon Feynman and/or it is a kind of a ultramontane is false then it is iritic. sent3: if the soapberry is not a vervet then it is not a kind of a Honegger or it does investigate songwriter or both. sent4: the soapberry is not ultramontane. sent5: there is something such that if it does not pounce then it is eonian or a crappie or both. sent6: the soapberry is not a angledozer. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a crappie then it is not endocrine and/or is photoconductive. sent8: the soapberry is iritic if it either does not abandon Feynman or is a kind of a ultramontane or both. sent9: the soapberry is a clinometer and/or is a census. sent10: the frontal is enteric and/or it is a discomfiture. sent11: the soapberry is iritic if that it is not nonextensile and/or it does investigate hagfish is false. sent12: there exists something such that if it is iritic either it does not abandon Feynman or it is a ultramontane or both. sent13: the fact that the soapberry either does not debrief Titanosaurus or does debrief soapberry or both is false. sent14: the soapberry does abandon Feynman. sent15: if the fact that either the soapberry does abandon Feynman or it is a kind of a ultramontane or both is not right then the fact that it is iritic is not incorrect.
sent2 -> int1: if that the soapberry does not abandon Feynman and/or is ultramontane does not hold it is iritic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the soapberry does not abandon Feynman or is a ultramontane or both does not hold.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the soapberry is iritic.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the soapberry is not iritic is correct.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the soapberry does not abandon Feynman and/or it is a kind of a ultramontane.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: if the soapberry is not iritic it does not abandon Feynman and/or is a ultramontane.; int5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is non-iritic then either it does not abandon Feynman or it is a ultramontane or both. ; $context$ = sent1: something is iritic if it does not abandon Feynman and/or is a ultramontane. sent2: if that something does not abandon Feynman and/or it is a kind of a ultramontane is false then it is iritic. sent3: if the soapberry is not a vervet then it is not a kind of a Honegger or it does investigate songwriter or both. sent4: the soapberry is not ultramontane. sent5: there is something such that if it does not pounce then it is eonian or a crappie or both. sent6: the soapberry is not a angledozer. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a crappie then it is not endocrine and/or is photoconductive. sent8: the soapberry is iritic if it either does not abandon Feynman or is a kind of a ultramontane or both. sent9: the soapberry is a clinometer and/or is a census. sent10: the frontal is enteric and/or it is a discomfiture. sent11: the soapberry is iritic if that it is not nonextensile and/or it does investigate hagfish is false. sent12: there exists something such that if it is iritic either it does not abandon Feynman or it is a ultramontane or both. sent13: the fact that the soapberry either does not debrief Titanosaurus or does debrief soapberry or both is false. sent14: the soapberry does abandon Feynman. sent15: if the fact that either the soapberry does abandon Feynman or it is a kind of a ultramontane or both is not right then the fact that it is iritic is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: if that the soapberry does not abandon Feynman and/or is ultramontane does not hold it is iritic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the soapberry does not abandon Feynman or is a ultramontane or both does not hold.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the soapberry is iritic.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the soapberry is not iritic is correct.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the soapberry does not abandon Feynman and/or it is a kind of a ultramontane.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: if the soapberry is not iritic it does not abandon Feynman and/or is a ultramontane.; int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__