that the bluffer is angiomatous but not a plate does not hold if the serow does disavow hematochrome.
sent1: the gunlock is a kind of a shelduck that paves. sent2: that the serow is biotitic and not angiomatous is incorrect if the bluffer disavows hematochrome. sent3: the fruitlet is a kind of a plate. sent4: if the serow is angiomatous then that the bluffer is angiomatous but it is not a kind of a plate is not correct. sent5: if that the serow disavows hematochrome is correct then it is biotitic. sent6: that the bluffer is a kind of biotitic thing that is not angiomatous is wrong if that the serow plates is not incorrect. sent7: the Jacobite does disavow hematochrome. sent8: if something disavows hematochrome then it plates. sent9: that the bluffer disavows hematochrome but it is not a plate is false if the serow does disavows hematochrome. sent10: the bluffer is a kind of a LLM. sent11: if the serow is angiomatous then the fact that the bluffer is both angiomatous and a plate is not correct. sent12: the fact that the fact that the bluffer is angiomatous and it is a plate hold does not hold. sent13: the fact that the bluffer is angiomatous and it is a plate does not hold if the serow disavows hematochrome. sent14: if the char is biotitic that it is not a symbolist is not true. sent15: the bluffer is angiomatous and is not a plate if the serow is angiomatous. sent16: something that is a shelduck either is non-angiomatous or is not biotitic or both. sent17: the bluffer is not non-angiomatous and is not a plate. sent18: if the serow disavows hematochrome then the bluffer is angiomatous but it does not plate. sent19: if something is biotitic that it is angiomatous is not incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the serow disavows hematochrome.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the serow is biotitic.; sent19 -> int2: the serow is angiomatous if it is biotitic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the serow is angiomatous is true.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the fact that the bluffer is angiomatous but it is not a kind of a plate is not true.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the gunlock plates.
sent8 -> int5: the gunlock is a plate if it does disavow hematochrome.; sent16 -> int6: the gunlock is not angiomatous or is not biotitic or both if it is a shelduck.; sent1 -> int7: the gunlock is a shelduck.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the gunlock is not angiomatous or it is not biotitic or both.;
$hypothesis$ = that the bluffer is angiomatous but not a plate does not hold if the serow does disavow hematochrome. ; $context$ = sent1: the gunlock is a kind of a shelduck that paves. sent2: that the serow is biotitic and not angiomatous is incorrect if the bluffer disavows hematochrome. sent3: the fruitlet is a kind of a plate. sent4: if the serow is angiomatous then that the bluffer is angiomatous but it is not a kind of a plate is not correct. sent5: if that the serow disavows hematochrome is correct then it is biotitic. sent6: that the bluffer is a kind of biotitic thing that is not angiomatous is wrong if that the serow plates is not incorrect. sent7: the Jacobite does disavow hematochrome. sent8: if something disavows hematochrome then it plates. sent9: that the bluffer disavows hematochrome but it is not a plate is false if the serow does disavows hematochrome. sent10: the bluffer is a kind of a LLM. sent11: if the serow is angiomatous then the fact that the bluffer is both angiomatous and a plate is not correct. sent12: the fact that the fact that the bluffer is angiomatous and it is a plate hold does not hold. sent13: the fact that the bluffer is angiomatous and it is a plate does not hold if the serow disavows hematochrome. sent14: if the char is biotitic that it is not a symbolist is not true. sent15: the bluffer is angiomatous and is not a plate if the serow is angiomatous. sent16: something that is a shelduck either is non-angiomatous or is not biotitic or both. sent17: the bluffer is not non-angiomatous and is not a plate. sent18: if the serow disavows hematochrome then the bluffer is angiomatous but it does not plate. sent19: if something is biotitic that it is angiomatous is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the serow disavows hematochrome.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the serow is biotitic.; sent19 -> int2: the serow is angiomatous if it is biotitic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the serow is angiomatous is true.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the fact that the bluffer is angiomatous but it is not a kind of a plate is not true.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__