the stillroom does not swim schlepper.
sent1: that the production is not a workhorse is right if the fact that the stillroom does not pair anvil is not false. sent2: the hands is minimal. sent3: the fact that something pairs anvil and it is minimal is false if it is not nonretractile. sent4: the outboard does pare loonie but it is not minimal. sent5: if the stillroom pares loonie it does swim schlepper. sent6: the outboard is not a kind of a workhorse if the fact that the production does not pare loonie is not false. sent7: if the production does swim schlepper and it does pare loonie the stillroom is not nonretractile. sent8: if the production is non-minimal then that the outboard pares loonie and it is non-minimal is not correct. sent9: something is a kind of a workhorse if it does pair anvil. sent10: the outboard is not non-lexical. sent11: the production is not a kind of a workhorse but it is a angulation if the stillroom does not pair anvil. sent12: if the stillroom is nonretractile it swims schlepper. sent13: if the production is not minimal the fact that the outboard does pare loonie but it is not minimal is incorrect. sent14: the outboard is not minimal. sent15: the outboard does not swim schlepper. sent16: the production swims schlepper. sent17: the fact that that the production pares loonie but it is not a angulation is not correct is not wrong if the outboard is not a angulation. sent18: the outboard is a angulation. sent19: the outboard is not a Nilotic. sent20: if the production is a kind of an explosive and pares loonie it is retractile. sent21: something is nonretractile if it does pair anvil. sent22: if the production is not wingless then it does pare loonie and it is explosive. sent23: the production is not a workhorse. sent24: that the outboard does pare loonie and it is minimal is false. sent25: if that the production is a kind of a angulation hold it is non-minimal. sent26: that the schlepper is nonretractile is not wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stillroom does not pair anvil.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the production is not a workhorse but it is a kind of a angulation.; int1 -> int2: the production is a kind of a angulation.; int2 & sent25 -> int3: the production is not minimal.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: that the outboard pares loonie and is not minimal is false.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the stillroom does pair anvil.; sent21 -> int7: the stillroom is nonretractile if it does pair anvil.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the stillroom is nonretractile.; int8 & sent12 -> hypothesis;
the stillroom does not swim schlepper.
sent3 -> int9: if the production is not nonretractile then the fact that it does pair anvil and it is minimal does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the stillroom does not swim schlepper. ; $context$ = sent1: that the production is not a workhorse is right if the fact that the stillroom does not pair anvil is not false. sent2: the hands is minimal. sent3: the fact that something pairs anvil and it is minimal is false if it is not nonretractile. sent4: the outboard does pare loonie but it is not minimal. sent5: if the stillroom pares loonie it does swim schlepper. sent6: the outboard is not a kind of a workhorse if the fact that the production does not pare loonie is not false. sent7: if the production does swim schlepper and it does pare loonie the stillroom is not nonretractile. sent8: if the production is non-minimal then that the outboard pares loonie and it is non-minimal is not correct. sent9: something is a kind of a workhorse if it does pair anvil. sent10: the outboard is not non-lexical. sent11: the production is not a kind of a workhorse but it is a angulation if the stillroom does not pair anvil. sent12: if the stillroom is nonretractile it swims schlepper. sent13: if the production is not minimal the fact that the outboard does pare loonie but it is not minimal is incorrect. sent14: the outboard is not minimal. sent15: the outboard does not swim schlepper. sent16: the production swims schlepper. sent17: the fact that that the production pares loonie but it is not a angulation is not correct is not wrong if the outboard is not a angulation. sent18: the outboard is a angulation. sent19: the outboard is not a Nilotic. sent20: if the production is a kind of an explosive and pares loonie it is retractile. sent21: something is nonretractile if it does pair anvil. sent22: if the production is not wingless then it does pare loonie and it is explosive. sent23: the production is not a workhorse. sent24: that the outboard does pare loonie and it is minimal is false. sent25: if that the production is a kind of a angulation hold it is non-minimal. sent26: that the schlepper is nonretractile is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stillroom does not pair anvil.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the production is not a workhorse but it is a kind of a angulation.; int1 -> int2: the production is a kind of a angulation.; int2 & sent25 -> int3: the production is not minimal.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: that the outboard pares loonie and is not minimal is false.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the stillroom does pair anvil.; sent21 -> int7: the stillroom is nonretractile if it does pair anvil.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the stillroom is nonretractile.; int8 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__