there is something such that that it is not a mumble or it is not a Zukerman or both is not right.
sent1: the nirvana wenches and it urges. sent2: something is a glucosamine if it does wench. sent3: if the nirvana is not a kind of a Zukerman then that the inventory is not a mumble or is not a Zukerman or both is wrong. sent4: if something is a kind of a glucosamine then it does not shush sovereign. sent5: if something does not keratinize integration that it does not shush sovereign and it is a Zukerman is incorrect. sent6: the nirvana does not keratinize integration and is brahminic.
sent1 -> int1: the nirvana wenches.; sent2 -> int2: the nirvana is a kind of a glucosamine if it does wench.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the nirvana is a glucosamine.; sent4 -> int4: the nirvana does not shush sovereign if it is a glucosamine.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the nirvana does not shush sovereign.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the nirvana is a kind of a Zukerman.; int5 & assump1 -> int6: the nirvana does not shush sovereign and is a kind of a Zukerman.; sent5 -> int7: the fact that that the nirvana does not shush sovereign but it is a kind of the Zukerman is not right if the nirvana does not keratinize integration is right.; sent6 -> int8: the nirvana does not keratinize integration.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the nirvana does not shush sovereign but it is a Zukerman is not right.; int6 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: the nirvana is not a Zukerman.; int11 & sent3 -> int12: the fact that either the inventory is not a mumble or it is not a kind of a Zukerman or both is not correct.; int12 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that that it is not a mumble or it is not a Zukerman or both is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the nirvana wenches and it urges. sent2: something is a glucosamine if it does wench. sent3: if the nirvana is not a kind of a Zukerman then that the inventory is not a mumble or is not a Zukerman or both is wrong. sent4: if something is a kind of a glucosamine then it does not shush sovereign. sent5: if something does not keratinize integration that it does not shush sovereign and it is a Zukerman is incorrect. sent6: the nirvana does not keratinize integration and is brahminic. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: the nirvana wenches.; sent2 -> int2: the nirvana is a kind of a glucosamine if it does wench.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the nirvana is a glucosamine.; sent4 -> int4: the nirvana does not shush sovereign if it is a glucosamine.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the nirvana does not shush sovereign.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the nirvana is a kind of a Zukerman.; int5 & assump1 -> int6: the nirvana does not shush sovereign and is a kind of a Zukerman.; sent5 -> int7: the fact that that the nirvana does not shush sovereign but it is a kind of the Zukerman is not right if the nirvana does not keratinize integration is right.; sent6 -> int8: the nirvana does not keratinize integration.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the nirvana does not shush sovereign but it is a Zukerman is not right.; int6 & int9 -> int10: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int10 -> int11: the nirvana is not a Zukerman.; int11 & sent3 -> int12: the fact that either the inventory is not a mumble or it is not a kind of a Zukerman or both is not correct.; int12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__