the Pyrethrum is a qadi.
sent1: the Pyrethrum is not a kind of a qadi if the interrupter is a qadi. sent2: that something is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager is false if it is not a kind of a feelings. sent3: that that the interrupter is a kind of Tasmanian thing that is a salvager is wrong is true if it is not a kind of a feelings. sent4: if the PABA is not tearless then the fact that it does lamb Mott and it is a salvager is not correct. sent5: if that something is not a kind of a feelings is not false the fact that it is a kind of Tasmanian thing that is a salvager does not hold. sent6: the interrupter is not Tasmanian if the walnut is not a kind of a salvager. sent7: the Pyrethrum is Tasmanian. sent8: if the invagination is an adverbial then it is a Cabalist. sent9: that something is not a Cabalist but it is a feelings is not true if it is not Tasmanian. sent10: the interrupter does adduct invagination. sent11: if that the Pyrethrum is not a kind of an undressed but it is not non-Tasmanian is incorrect that it is not non-Tasmanian is correct. sent12: the fact that the interrupter is not a Kenyata but it is a Cabalist is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the Pyrethrum is a kind of a qadi if the interrupter is a salvager hold. sent14: the interrupter is not a Cabalist if that it is not a Kenyata and is a Cabalist does not hold. sent15: if that the interrupter is a kind of a feelings is not false it is a Cabalist. sent16: if that the interrupter is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager is incorrect then the Pyrethrum is a qadi. sent17: the fact that the Pyrethrum is a feelings but it is not a qadi is not right if it is not Tasmanian. sent18: the fact that the interrupter is Tasmanian and is a salvager is wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the interrupter is a feelings.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the interrupter is a Cabalist.; sent14 & sent12 -> int2: the interrupter is not a kind of a Cabalist.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the interrupter is not a feelings.; sent2 -> int5: that the interrupter is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager is false if the fact that it is not a feelings hold.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the interrupter is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager does not hold.; int6 & sent16 -> hypothesis;
the Pyrethrum is not a qadi.
sent9 -> int7: the fact that the interrupter is not a kind of a Cabalist but it is a kind of a feelings is not right if it is not Tasmanian.;
$hypothesis$ = the Pyrethrum is a qadi. ; $context$ = sent1: the Pyrethrum is not a kind of a qadi if the interrupter is a qadi. sent2: that something is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager is false if it is not a kind of a feelings. sent3: that that the interrupter is a kind of Tasmanian thing that is a salvager is wrong is true if it is not a kind of a feelings. sent4: if the PABA is not tearless then the fact that it does lamb Mott and it is a salvager is not correct. sent5: if that something is not a kind of a feelings is not false the fact that it is a kind of Tasmanian thing that is a salvager does not hold. sent6: the interrupter is not Tasmanian if the walnut is not a kind of a salvager. sent7: the Pyrethrum is Tasmanian. sent8: if the invagination is an adverbial then it is a Cabalist. sent9: that something is not a Cabalist but it is a feelings is not true if it is not Tasmanian. sent10: the interrupter does adduct invagination. sent11: if that the Pyrethrum is not a kind of an undressed but it is not non-Tasmanian is incorrect that it is not non-Tasmanian is correct. sent12: the fact that the interrupter is not a Kenyata but it is a Cabalist is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the Pyrethrum is a kind of a qadi if the interrupter is a salvager hold. sent14: the interrupter is not a Cabalist if that it is not a Kenyata and is a Cabalist does not hold. sent15: if that the interrupter is a kind of a feelings is not false it is a Cabalist. sent16: if that the interrupter is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager is incorrect then the Pyrethrum is a qadi. sent17: the fact that the Pyrethrum is a feelings but it is not a qadi is not right if it is not Tasmanian. sent18: the fact that the interrupter is Tasmanian and is a salvager is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the interrupter is a feelings.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the interrupter is a Cabalist.; sent14 & sent12 -> int2: the interrupter is not a kind of a Cabalist.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the interrupter is not a feelings.; sent2 -> int5: that the interrupter is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager is false if the fact that it is not a feelings hold.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the interrupter is Tasmanian but it is not a salvager does not hold.; int6 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__