something is a deliverable and it does dehydrogenate Brachinus.
sent1: something is deniable and dehydrogenates Brachinus. sent2: if there exists something such that that it resubmits Pelagianism and it is not a kind of a Mannheim is false then the rutabaga does dehydrogenate Brachinus. sent3: the fact that the windfall is a kind of a buntal is not false if the ectoplasm is non-deniable thing that is not helpful. sent4: if the fact that the windfall is tarsal thing that is not a Stoic is not true then the roebuck is a kind of an arroyo. sent5: there exists nothing such that it resubmits Pelagianism and is not a Mannheim. sent6: there is something such that it does dehydrogenate implosion. sent7: if the roebuck is an arroyo the rutabaga is a kind of a deliverable. sent8: if something is a kind of a buntal then that it is both a tarsal and not a Stoic is false. sent9: the fact that that something does hive but it is not a kind of a Latvian is wrong if it is a charge is correct. sent10: the ectoplasm is undeniable thing that is not helpful if the Pilsner is monotheistic. sent11: the Pilsner is monotheistic.
sent10 & sent11 -> int1: the ectoplasm is not deniable and not helpful.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the windfall is a buntal.; sent8 -> int3: if the windfall is a buntal then the fact that it is both tarsal and not a Stoic is not true.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the windfall is not non-tarsal but it is non-Stoic is wrong.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the roebuck is an arroyo.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the rutabaga is deliverable.; sent5 -> int7: that the gametangium resubmits Pelagianism but it is not a kind of a Mannheim is not right.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it resubmits Pelagianism and it is not a Mannheim is wrong.; int8 & sent2 -> int9: the rutabaga does dehydrogenate Brachinus.; int6 & int9 -> int10: the rutabaga is a deliverable and it dehydrogenates Brachinus.; int10 -> hypothesis;
if the rutabaga is a charge then that it does hive and it is non-Latvian does not hold.
sent9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = something is a deliverable and it does dehydrogenate Brachinus. ; $context$ = sent1: something is deniable and dehydrogenates Brachinus. sent2: if there exists something such that that it resubmits Pelagianism and it is not a kind of a Mannheim is false then the rutabaga does dehydrogenate Brachinus. sent3: the fact that the windfall is a kind of a buntal is not false if the ectoplasm is non-deniable thing that is not helpful. sent4: if the fact that the windfall is tarsal thing that is not a Stoic is not true then the roebuck is a kind of an arroyo. sent5: there exists nothing such that it resubmits Pelagianism and is not a Mannheim. sent6: there is something such that it does dehydrogenate implosion. sent7: if the roebuck is an arroyo the rutabaga is a kind of a deliverable. sent8: if something is a kind of a buntal then that it is both a tarsal and not a Stoic is false. sent9: the fact that that something does hive but it is not a kind of a Latvian is wrong if it is a charge is correct. sent10: the ectoplasm is undeniable thing that is not helpful if the Pilsner is monotheistic. sent11: the Pilsner is monotheistic. ; $proof$ = 
sent10 & sent11 -> int1: the ectoplasm is not deniable and not helpful.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the windfall is a buntal.; sent8 -> int3: if the windfall is a buntal then the fact that it is both tarsal and not a Stoic is not true.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the windfall is not non-tarsal but it is non-Stoic is wrong.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the roebuck is an arroyo.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the rutabaga is deliverable.; sent5 -> int7: that the gametangium resubmits Pelagianism but it is not a kind of a Mannheim is not right.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it resubmits Pelagianism and it is not a Mannheim is wrong.; int8 & sent2 -> int9: the rutabaga does dehydrogenate Brachinus.; int6 & int9 -> int10: the rutabaga is a deliverable and it dehydrogenates Brachinus.; int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__