the pierid is not a crush.
sent1: if the buzzer is unethical then the fact that either it is not a kind of a self-deception or it is a ideography or both is false. sent2: the fact that the pierid is not a kind of a biweekly and does crush is wrong if the dimwit is not a kind of a biweekly. sent3: the dimwit is not a Stheno if it does not spill drawn. sent4: if the fact that the dimwit does not dilapidate hysterotomy is not incorrect that that the magdalen does dilapidate hysterotomy and is not a kind of a damp is not right is right. sent5: if that the groenendael does not dilapidate hysterotomy and it is not a self-deception does not hold that the pierid is not a crush is right. sent6: if the fact that the buzzer is not a self-deception or it is a ideography or both is wrong the reporter is not a self-deception. sent7: if the reporter is not a self-deception then the groenendael spills drawn. sent8: the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy if there exists something such that it spills drawn and it is a damp. sent9: the dimwit damps. sent10: if the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy but it damps the fact that the dimwit is not a damps is not wrong. sent11: that the groenendael does not dilapidate hysterotomy and it is not a self-deception does not hold if the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy. sent12: something is unethical if it is a kind of a remit. sent13: if the dimwit does not spill drawn it is not a Stheno but a biweekly. sent14: if something spills drawn it is both not a Steller and an antioxidant. sent15: the pierid does not spill Turki. sent16: the dimwit is a steenbok. sent17: the fact that the buzzer is a remit is correct. sent18: the fact that the dimwit is not a Stheno but it is a biweekly is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the dimwit does not spill drawn hold.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the dimwit is not a Stheno but it is a kind of a biweekly is not wrong.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the dimwit does not spill drawn is wrong.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the dimwit spills drawn and it does damp.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it spills drawn and is a damp.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the fact that the groenendael does not dilapidate hysterotomy and is not a self-deception is incorrect.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the isolation is not a kind of a Steller but it is a kind of an antioxidant.
sent14 -> int8: if the isolation does spill drawn it is both not a Steller and an antioxidant.;
$hypothesis$ = the pierid is not a crush. ; $context$ = sent1: if the buzzer is unethical then the fact that either it is not a kind of a self-deception or it is a ideography or both is false. sent2: the fact that the pierid is not a kind of a biweekly and does crush is wrong if the dimwit is not a kind of a biweekly. sent3: the dimwit is not a Stheno if it does not spill drawn. sent4: if the fact that the dimwit does not dilapidate hysterotomy is not incorrect that that the magdalen does dilapidate hysterotomy and is not a kind of a damp is not right is right. sent5: if that the groenendael does not dilapidate hysterotomy and it is not a self-deception does not hold that the pierid is not a crush is right. sent6: if the fact that the buzzer is not a self-deception or it is a ideography or both is wrong the reporter is not a self-deception. sent7: if the reporter is not a self-deception then the groenendael spills drawn. sent8: the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy if there exists something such that it spills drawn and it is a damp. sent9: the dimwit damps. sent10: if the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy but it damps the fact that the dimwit is not a damps is not wrong. sent11: that the groenendael does not dilapidate hysterotomy and it is not a self-deception does not hold if the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy. sent12: something is unethical if it is a kind of a remit. sent13: if the dimwit does not spill drawn it is not a Stheno but a biweekly. sent14: if something spills drawn it is both not a Steller and an antioxidant. sent15: the pierid does not spill Turki. sent16: the dimwit is a steenbok. sent17: the fact that the buzzer is a remit is correct. sent18: the fact that the dimwit is not a Stheno but it is a biweekly is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the dimwit does not spill drawn hold.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the dimwit is not a Stheno but it is a kind of a biweekly is not wrong.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the dimwit does not spill drawn is wrong.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the dimwit spills drawn and it does damp.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it spills drawn and is a damp.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: the magdalen does not dilapidate hysterotomy.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the fact that the groenendael does not dilapidate hysterotomy and is not a self-deception is incorrect.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__