either the concourse is a kind of a sputter or it is robotics or both.
sent1: if the hermit is not isotropic but it cautions the evacuee is not cyclothymic. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of non-isotropic a caution is not true the concourse is cationic. sent3: if the Kakemono is amoristic that the homebuilder does not render Wade and does not stray does not hold. sent4: the fact that the rebozo is not cyclothymic and does not dun dereliction is not right if the hermit does render Wade. sent5: if the Kakemono is a kind of a Ascaridia then it is amoristic. sent6: the hermit does stray but it is not cationic if the evacuee is a sputter. sent7: the Kakemono is a Ascaridia. sent8: the hermit is a caution. sent9: if something is not a Ascaridia then it is not non-robotics and it sputters. sent10: the fact that the evacuee is not a Ascaridia is correct. sent11: something renders Wade if it strays. sent12: if the evacuee is not cyclothymic the homebuilder does not render Wade and it does not stray. sent13: something sputters if it is cationic. sent14: something does dun dereliction if that it is not cyclothymic and it does not dun dereliction does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hermit is non-isotropic thing that is a caution.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the evacuee is not cyclothymic.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the homebuilder does not render Wade and it does not stray.; sent5 & sent7 -> int3: that the Kakemono is amoristic is true.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: that the homebuilder does not render Wade and does not stray does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the hermit is not isotropic but a caution is not right.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that that it is not isotropic and it is a caution is false.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: the concourse is cationic.; sent13 -> int9: if the concourse is cationic then it sputters.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the concourse is a kind of a sputter.; int10 -> hypothesis;
the rebozo duns dereliction and/or it is amoristic.
sent14 -> int11: the fact that the rebozo does dun dereliction if that the rebozo is not cyclothymic and it does not dun dereliction is not right is correct.; sent11 -> int12: the fact that the hermit renders Wade is not false if it is a stray.; sent9 -> int13: if the fact that the evacuee is not a kind of a Ascaridia is true then it is robotics and it does sputter.; int13 & sent10 -> int14: the evacuee is robotics and does sputter.; int14 -> int15: the evacuee sputters.; sent6 & int15 -> int16: the hermit is a stray but not cationic.; int16 -> int17: the hermit is a stray.; int12 & int17 -> int18: the hermit does render Wade.; sent4 & int18 -> int19: that the rebozo is non-cyclothymic thing that does not dun dereliction is wrong.; int11 & int19 -> int20: the rebozo duns dereliction.; int20 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = either the concourse is a kind of a sputter or it is robotics or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hermit is not isotropic but it cautions the evacuee is not cyclothymic. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of non-isotropic a caution is not true the concourse is cationic. sent3: if the Kakemono is amoristic that the homebuilder does not render Wade and does not stray does not hold. sent4: the fact that the rebozo is not cyclothymic and does not dun dereliction is not right if the hermit does render Wade. sent5: if the Kakemono is a kind of a Ascaridia then it is amoristic. sent6: the hermit does stray but it is not cationic if the evacuee is a sputter. sent7: the Kakemono is a Ascaridia. sent8: the hermit is a caution. sent9: if something is not a Ascaridia then it is not non-robotics and it sputters. sent10: the fact that the evacuee is not a Ascaridia is correct. sent11: something renders Wade if it strays. sent12: if the evacuee is not cyclothymic the homebuilder does not render Wade and it does not stray. sent13: something sputters if it is cationic. sent14: something does dun dereliction if that it is not cyclothymic and it does not dun dereliction does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hermit is non-isotropic thing that is a caution.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the evacuee is not cyclothymic.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the homebuilder does not render Wade and it does not stray.; sent5 & sent7 -> int3: that the Kakemono is amoristic is true.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: that the homebuilder does not render Wade and does not stray does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the hermit is not isotropic but a caution is not right.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that that it is not isotropic and it is a caution is false.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: the concourse is cationic.; sent13 -> int9: if the concourse is cationic then it sputters.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the concourse is a kind of a sputter.; int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__