the fact that the domatium is a kind of a filaggrin that is not impartial does not hold.
sent1: that the deodorant is birefringent but not an abrasive is false. sent2: the hallway is not birefringent. sent3: if the domatium is a filaggrin and it is impartial then it is not birefringent. sent4: if that the hallway is not non-colorectal and not an abrasive does not hold then the deodorant is a kind of an abrasive. sent5: the deodorant is not colorectal if it is a filaggrin but not an abrasive. sent6: the hallway is a kind of a filaggrin and is not an abrasive. sent7: that the domatium is a filaggrin that is impartial is not correct. sent8: the fact that the domatium is an abrasive and it is birefringent is not correct. sent9: the domatium is not birefringent if it is a kind of a filaggrin and it is not impartial. sent10: if that the domatium is not birefringent is not wrong then the deodorant is not a kind of an abrasive. sent11: the deodorant is an abrasive if the fact that the hallway is an abrasive is right. sent12: the domatium is impartial if the hallway is impartial. sent13: the domatium is not impartial if the hallway is not a filaggrin. sent14: the fact that the hallway is a kind of colorectal thing that is not an abrasive does not hold. sent15: the fact that the domatium is colorectal but not a filaggrin does not hold. sent16: the turbot does tag bobble but it does not gazump. sent17: the fact that the fact that the hallway is colorectal and it is a kind of an abrasive does not hold hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the domatium is both a filaggrin and not impartial.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the domatium is not birefringent.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the deodorant is not an abrasive.; sent4 & sent14 -> int3: that the deodorant is an abrasive is true.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the domatium is a filaggrin that is not impartial is not incorrect.
sent2 -> int5: something is not birefringent.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the domatium is a kind of a filaggrin that is not impartial does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the deodorant is birefringent but not an abrasive is false. sent2: the hallway is not birefringent. sent3: if the domatium is a filaggrin and it is impartial then it is not birefringent. sent4: if that the hallway is not non-colorectal and not an abrasive does not hold then the deodorant is a kind of an abrasive. sent5: the deodorant is not colorectal if it is a filaggrin but not an abrasive. sent6: the hallway is a kind of a filaggrin and is not an abrasive. sent7: that the domatium is a filaggrin that is impartial is not correct. sent8: the fact that the domatium is an abrasive and it is birefringent is not correct. sent9: the domatium is not birefringent if it is a kind of a filaggrin and it is not impartial. sent10: if that the domatium is not birefringent is not wrong then the deodorant is not a kind of an abrasive. sent11: the deodorant is an abrasive if the fact that the hallway is an abrasive is right. sent12: the domatium is impartial if the hallway is impartial. sent13: the domatium is not impartial if the hallway is not a filaggrin. sent14: the fact that the hallway is a kind of colorectal thing that is not an abrasive does not hold. sent15: the fact that the domatium is colorectal but not a filaggrin does not hold. sent16: the turbot does tag bobble but it does not gazump. sent17: the fact that the fact that the hallway is colorectal and it is a kind of an abrasive does not hold hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the domatium is both a filaggrin and not impartial.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the domatium is not birefringent.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the deodorant is not an abrasive.; sent4 & sent14 -> int3: that the deodorant is an abrasive is true.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__