the rook is not binucleate.
sent1: if there is something such that it is not a suspect and it is not a kind of a hypophysectomy then the plane does not aggregate checkmate. sent2: the parapsychologist does not move Filoviridae if the fact that the undersecretary is not a kind of a bit but it is a brigade is not true. sent3: the parapsychologist does aggregate checkmate if the nipa is a kind of a senility. sent4: if something does not aggregate checkmate then the fact that it is not consistent and it is not a brigade does not hold. sent5: the rook is not binucleate if the nipa does not dissociate rook. sent6: if that something is not a suspect and it is not a hypophysectomy is false then it is not a senility. sent7: the fact that something is not a bit but a brigade does not hold if it is not a kind of a senility. sent8: the rook is binucleate if the plane is binucleate. sent9: if the parapsychologist does not move Filoviridae then the nipa does not move Filoviridae and/or it does not dissociate rook. sent10: the fact that the plane is a Fahd but it does not eavesdrop is wrong. sent11: the rook is not binucleate if the nipa does not move Filoviridae. sent12: if the fact that the parapsychologist is binucleate is not false then the plane is binucleate. sent13: the plane aggregates checkmate if the fact that it is a Fahd and it does not eavesdrop is not right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the undersecretary is not a suspect and not a hypophysectomy.; assump1 -> int1: something is not a suspect and is not a hypophysectomy.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the plane does not aggregate checkmate.; sent13 & sent10 -> int3: the plane does aggregate checkmate.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the undersecretary is not a kind of a suspect and is not a hypophysectomy is not correct.; sent6 -> int6: the undersecretary is not a senility if that it is not a suspect and not a hypophysectomy is wrong.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the undersecretary is not a senility.; sent7 -> int8: the fact that the undersecretary does not bite but it is a brigade is false if it is not a senility.; int7 & int8 -> int9: that the undersecretary does not bite and brigades is not right.; int9 & sent2 -> int10: the parapsychologist does not move Filoviridae.; int10 & sent9 -> int11: either the nipa does not move Filoviridae or it does not dissociate rook or both.; int11 & sent11 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
that the pinnacle is not consistent and not a brigade is not right.
sent4 -> int12: if the pinnacle does not aggregate checkmate then the fact that it is not consistent and not a brigade is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the rook is not binucleate. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is not a suspect and it is not a kind of a hypophysectomy then the plane does not aggregate checkmate. sent2: the parapsychologist does not move Filoviridae if the fact that the undersecretary is not a kind of a bit but it is a brigade is not true. sent3: the parapsychologist does aggregate checkmate if the nipa is a kind of a senility. sent4: if something does not aggregate checkmate then the fact that it is not consistent and it is not a brigade does not hold. sent5: the rook is not binucleate if the nipa does not dissociate rook. sent6: if that something is not a suspect and it is not a hypophysectomy is false then it is not a senility. sent7: the fact that something is not a bit but a brigade does not hold if it is not a kind of a senility. sent8: the rook is binucleate if the plane is binucleate. sent9: if the parapsychologist does not move Filoviridae then the nipa does not move Filoviridae and/or it does not dissociate rook. sent10: the fact that the plane is a Fahd but it does not eavesdrop is wrong. sent11: the rook is not binucleate if the nipa does not move Filoviridae. sent12: if the fact that the parapsychologist is binucleate is not false then the plane is binucleate. sent13: the plane aggregates checkmate if the fact that it is a Fahd and it does not eavesdrop is not right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the undersecretary is not a suspect and not a hypophysectomy.; assump1 -> int1: something is not a suspect and is not a hypophysectomy.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the plane does not aggregate checkmate.; sent13 & sent10 -> int3: the plane does aggregate checkmate.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the undersecretary is not a kind of a suspect and is not a hypophysectomy is not correct.; sent6 -> int6: the undersecretary is not a senility if that it is not a suspect and not a hypophysectomy is wrong.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the undersecretary is not a senility.; sent7 -> int8: the fact that the undersecretary does not bite but it is a brigade is false if it is not a senility.; int7 & int8 -> int9: that the undersecretary does not bite and brigades is not right.; int9 & sent2 -> int10: the parapsychologist does not move Filoviridae.; int10 & sent9 -> int11: either the nipa does not move Filoviridae or it does not dissociate rook or both.; int11 & sent11 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__