the suffragan is not acetonic and it is not a counterattack.
sent1: the suffragan is a saprolite. sent2: the throw is a woe. sent3: the stork does grandstand and is acetonic. sent4: the throw is not a abruption if it is not a kind of a Briton. sent5: if the suffragan counterattacks then the throw is a counterattacks. sent6: if something is not a saprolite then it does not counterattack. sent7: something is not acetonic and it does not counterattack if it is not a battlesight. sent8: that something is not a woe if it is not acetonic is true. sent9: the suffragan debars cardhouse and it is a nonabsorbency. sent10: the suffragan is a kind of tasteful an oregano. sent11: the throw is not a kind of a woe if the suffragan is a saprolite and is a battlesight. sent12: the suffragan does counterattack and it is a saprolite if the hollygrape is not a battlesight. sent13: if something is not a battlesight then it is not acetonic. sent14: the fact that the pulse is not an apogee but it does desecrate rhumba is false if it is phonogramic. sent15: the pulse is phonogramic. sent16: the onychophoran does not group sturgeon if there is something such that the fact that it is not an apogee and it does desecrate rhumba is not correct. sent17: the couchette is not an apogee. sent18: the throw is both not a battlesight and a saprolite if the hollygrape is a woe. sent19: the suffragan is not a kind of a counterattack if it is not a kind of a silicate. sent20: that something desecrates rhumba and does group sturgeon hold if it is not an apogee. sent21: if either the couchette desecrates rhumba or it is non-acetonic or both then the hollygrape is not non-acetonic. sent22: something is not a treasurer and is not a sulky if the fact that it is not a kind of a sashay hold. sent23: if the couchette is a kind of a woe the hollygrape is a woe. sent24: if the suffragan is not a battlesight then it is not acetonic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the suffragan is a battlesight.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the suffragan is a saprolite and is a battlesight.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the throw is not a kind of a woe.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the suffragan is not a kind of a battlesight.; sent7 -> int5: the fact that if the suffragan is not the battlesight then the suffragan is a kind of non-acetonic thing that is not a counterattack is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
the throw is a counterattack.
sent20 -> int6: the couchette desecrates rhumba and it groups sturgeon if it is not an apogee.; int6 & sent17 -> int7: the couchette does desecrate rhumba and it groups sturgeon.; int7 -> int8: that the couchette does desecrate rhumba is not false.; int8 -> int9: the couchette does desecrate rhumba and/or is not acetonic.; sent21 & int9 -> int10: the hollygrape is not acetonic.;
$hypothesis$ = the suffragan is not acetonic and it is not a counterattack. ; $context$ = sent1: the suffragan is a saprolite. sent2: the throw is a woe. sent3: the stork does grandstand and is acetonic. sent4: the throw is not a abruption if it is not a kind of a Briton. sent5: if the suffragan counterattacks then the throw is a counterattacks. sent6: if something is not a saprolite then it does not counterattack. sent7: something is not acetonic and it does not counterattack if it is not a battlesight. sent8: that something is not a woe if it is not acetonic is true. sent9: the suffragan debars cardhouse and it is a nonabsorbency. sent10: the suffragan is a kind of tasteful an oregano. sent11: the throw is not a kind of a woe if the suffragan is a saprolite and is a battlesight. sent12: the suffragan does counterattack and it is a saprolite if the hollygrape is not a battlesight. sent13: if something is not a battlesight then it is not acetonic. sent14: the fact that the pulse is not an apogee but it does desecrate rhumba is false if it is phonogramic. sent15: the pulse is phonogramic. sent16: the onychophoran does not group sturgeon if there is something such that the fact that it is not an apogee and it does desecrate rhumba is not correct. sent17: the couchette is not an apogee. sent18: the throw is both not a battlesight and a saprolite if the hollygrape is a woe. sent19: the suffragan is not a kind of a counterattack if it is not a kind of a silicate. sent20: that something desecrates rhumba and does group sturgeon hold if it is not an apogee. sent21: if either the couchette desecrates rhumba or it is non-acetonic or both then the hollygrape is not non-acetonic. sent22: something is not a treasurer and is not a sulky if the fact that it is not a kind of a sashay hold. sent23: if the couchette is a kind of a woe the hollygrape is a woe. sent24: if the suffragan is not a battlesight then it is not acetonic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the suffragan is a battlesight.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the suffragan is a saprolite and is a battlesight.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the throw is not a kind of a woe.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the suffragan is not a kind of a battlesight.; sent7 -> int5: the fact that if the suffragan is not the battlesight then the suffragan is a kind of non-acetonic thing that is not a counterattack is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__