the midstream forgets or it does detonate or both.
sent1: the oilstone agrees if the lowland does not intrigue pro. sent2: either the lowland forgets or it is a tun or both. sent3: the midstream is a holster and/or it is forceless if there is something such that it laps respite. sent4: the lowland is not a filigree. sent5: the oilstone is a tun. sent6: the heartwood does lap respite. sent7: if either the oilstone is not a kind of a neurasthenic or it is periodontics or both then the midstream forgets. sent8: if the oilstone does not intrigue pro the lowland does not agree but it is a kind of a tun. sent9: if something intrigues pro then it is periodontics. sent10: that the lowland is a kind of non-neurasthenic thing that does detonate is not correct if it does not agree. sent11: the fact that something does not forget and it is not neurasthenic does not hold if it detonates. sent12: the lowland is a kind of an example if that the midstream is a kind of a holster is not incorrect. sent13: the housemate does not intrigue pro but it intrigues oca if the oilstone is not periodontics. sent14: if the fact that something does not forget and it is not a kind of a neurasthenic is wrong it is not periodontics. sent15: the fact that that the lowland does not agree but it is a tun is right is incorrect if it does not filigree.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the oilstone does not intrigue pro.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: that the lowland does not agree and is a tun is not false.; sent15 & sent4 -> int2: that the lowland does not agree and is a tun is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the oilstone does intrigue pro.; sent9 -> int5: the oilstone is periodontics if it does intrigue pro.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the oilstone is periodontics.; int6 -> int7: the oilstone is not a kind of a neurasthenic or is not non-periodontics or both.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the midstream forgets.; int8 -> hypothesis;
the housemate does not intrigue pro but it intrigues oca.
sent14 -> int9: if that the oilstone does not forget and it is not a kind of a neurasthenic does not hold then it is not periodontics.; sent11 -> int10: if the fact that the oilstone does not detonate is not correct then that it does not forget and it is not a neurasthenic is false.; sent6 -> int11: there is something such that it does lap respite.; int11 & sent3 -> int12: the midstream is a holster and/or it is forceless.;
$hypothesis$ = the midstream forgets or it does detonate or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the oilstone agrees if the lowland does not intrigue pro. sent2: either the lowland forgets or it is a tun or both. sent3: the midstream is a holster and/or it is forceless if there is something such that it laps respite. sent4: the lowland is not a filigree. sent5: the oilstone is a tun. sent6: the heartwood does lap respite. sent7: if either the oilstone is not a kind of a neurasthenic or it is periodontics or both then the midstream forgets. sent8: if the oilstone does not intrigue pro the lowland does not agree but it is a kind of a tun. sent9: if something intrigues pro then it is periodontics. sent10: that the lowland is a kind of non-neurasthenic thing that does detonate is not correct if it does not agree. sent11: the fact that something does not forget and it is not neurasthenic does not hold if it detonates. sent12: the lowland is a kind of an example if that the midstream is a kind of a holster is not incorrect. sent13: the housemate does not intrigue pro but it intrigues oca if the oilstone is not periodontics. sent14: if the fact that something does not forget and it is not a kind of a neurasthenic is wrong it is not periodontics. sent15: the fact that that the lowland does not agree but it is a tun is right is incorrect if it does not filigree. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the oilstone does not intrigue pro.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: that the lowland does not agree and is a tun is not false.; sent15 & sent4 -> int2: that the lowland does not agree and is a tun is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the oilstone does intrigue pro.; sent9 -> int5: the oilstone is periodontics if it does intrigue pro.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the oilstone is periodontics.; int6 -> int7: the oilstone is not a kind of a neurasthenic or is not non-periodontics or both.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the midstream forgets.; int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__