the fact that the extinction is not a kind of a brightness but it lightens is wrong.
sent1: the down-and-out is not a kind of a aba if the eardrop is a combustible and/or it is not abactinal. sent2: something is not non-Irish and/or it does not lighten. sent3: the withholder is not pyrographic. sent4: the frigidity is a Tertry if the down-and-out is not a aba. sent5: if the fact that something is a Tertry is right it is a kind of a Irish. sent6: if the eardrop is a Irish the popper is a Irish. sent7: there is something such that the fact that it is a Tertry and/or it is a Mansi is not right. sent8: the fact that the withholder is a Mansi or it is not abactinal or both is not right. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it either is a kind of a combustible or is not anticancer or both is wrong then the chokey is not Irish. sent10: something is not a brightness but it lightens if it is not a kind of a Tertry. sent11: the eardrop lightens. sent12: that the extinction is a Mansi if the withholder does not lighten is correct. sent13: that the fact that the frigidity is both a Tertry and combustible is false is not incorrect. sent14: that the extinction is not a kind of a Tertry and is a combustible is not correct if the frigidity is a kind of a brightness. sent15: the extinction is combustible and/or non-pyrographic. sent16: that the extinction is both pyrographic and not impious is not true. sent17: something is not a Mansi and it is not a kind of a Tertry if that it is not a kind of a aba is correct. sent18: if the eardrop is not a Mansi and is not a Tertry the extinction is not a Tertry. sent19: if the frigidity is a Tertry the fact that the withholder is non-Irish thing that is not a Mansi does not hold. sent20: the extinction is not pyrographic if there exists something such that that either it is a combustible or it is not abactinal or both is not right. sent21: the fact that the chokey is anticancer is not wrong. sent22: the withholder is not a Irish and it is not a kind of a Mansi if the chokey is anticancer. sent23: that the eardrop is not a aba is not incorrect if it is not a Irish and it is not pyrographic. sent24: the down-and-out is not a mosaicism. sent25: if the extinction is not pyrographic then the fact that it is not a brightness and does lighten does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the eardrop is a kind of a combustible or it is not abactinal or both.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the down-and-out is not a aba.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the frigidity is a Tertry.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: the fact that the withholder is not a Irish and it is not a Mansi is wrong.; sent22 & sent21 -> int4: the withholder is not a kind of a Irish and it is not a kind of a Mansi.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the eardrop is a kind of a combustible or it is not abactinal or both is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it is either not noncombustible or non-abactinal or both does not hold.; int7 & sent20 -> int8: the fact that the extinction is pyrographic does not hold.; int8 & sent25 -> hypothesis;
the popper is Irish.
sent5 -> int9: the eardrop is Irish if it is a Tertry.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the extinction is not a kind of a brightness but it lightens is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the down-and-out is not a kind of a aba if the eardrop is a combustible and/or it is not abactinal. sent2: something is not non-Irish and/or it does not lighten. sent3: the withholder is not pyrographic. sent4: the frigidity is a Tertry if the down-and-out is not a aba. sent5: if the fact that something is a Tertry is right it is a kind of a Irish. sent6: if the eardrop is a Irish the popper is a Irish. sent7: there is something such that the fact that it is a Tertry and/or it is a Mansi is not right. sent8: the fact that the withholder is a Mansi or it is not abactinal or both is not right. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it either is a kind of a combustible or is not anticancer or both is wrong then the chokey is not Irish. sent10: something is not a brightness but it lightens if it is not a kind of a Tertry. sent11: the eardrop lightens. sent12: that the extinction is a Mansi if the withholder does not lighten is correct. sent13: that the fact that the frigidity is both a Tertry and combustible is false is not incorrect. sent14: that the extinction is not a kind of a Tertry and is a combustible is not correct if the frigidity is a kind of a brightness. sent15: the extinction is combustible and/or non-pyrographic. sent16: that the extinction is both pyrographic and not impious is not true. sent17: something is not a Mansi and it is not a kind of a Tertry if that it is not a kind of a aba is correct. sent18: if the eardrop is not a Mansi and is not a Tertry the extinction is not a Tertry. sent19: if the frigidity is a Tertry the fact that the withholder is non-Irish thing that is not a Mansi does not hold. sent20: the extinction is not pyrographic if there exists something such that that either it is a combustible or it is not abactinal or both is not right. sent21: the fact that the chokey is anticancer is not wrong. sent22: the withholder is not a Irish and it is not a kind of a Mansi if the chokey is anticancer. sent23: that the eardrop is not a aba is not incorrect if it is not a Irish and it is not pyrographic. sent24: the down-and-out is not a mosaicism. sent25: if the extinction is not pyrographic then the fact that it is not a brightness and does lighten does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the eardrop is a kind of a combustible or it is not abactinal or both.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the down-and-out is not a aba.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the frigidity is a Tertry.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: the fact that the withholder is not a Irish and it is not a Mansi is wrong.; sent22 & sent21 -> int4: the withholder is not a kind of a Irish and it is not a kind of a Mansi.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the eardrop is a kind of a combustible or it is not abactinal or both is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it is either not noncombustible or non-abactinal or both does not hold.; int7 & sent20 -> int8: the fact that the extinction is pyrographic does not hold.; int8 & sent25 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__