the fact that the benedick does not caucus cornhusker but it caucuses voluptuousness is not right.
sent1: that if the iodochlorhydroxyquin is the Murrow then the iodochlorhydroxyquin caucuses rescuer hold. sent2: the tentorium does caucus Ouse if the benedick does not caucus cornhusker and caucuses voluptuousness. sent3: something caucuses rescuer if it is a subsoil. sent4: either something is a subsoil or it is a Murrow or both if it does not admeasure jag. sent5: that something is not psychiatric but it does cover onychosis does not hold if it is not a sweeping. sent6: that the benedick caucuses cornhusker and it does caucus voluptuousness is false. sent7: that the benedick does not caucus cornhusker hold. sent8: the tentorium sweeps and does not caucus Ouse. sent9: the tentorium caucuses Ouse if the benedick does caucus cornhusker and does caucus voluptuousness. sent10: the tentorium is a sweeping.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the benedick does not caucus cornhusker but it caucuses voluptuousness.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the tentorium does caucus Ouse is not incorrect.; sent8 -> int2: the tentorium does not caucus Ouse.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the tentorium is non-psychiatric thing that covers onychosis does not hold.
sent5 -> int4: the fact that the tentorium is not psychiatric and does cover onychosis does not hold if it is not a kind of a sweeping.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the benedick does not caucus cornhusker but it caucuses voluptuousness is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that if the iodochlorhydroxyquin is the Murrow then the iodochlorhydroxyquin caucuses rescuer hold. sent2: the tentorium does caucus Ouse if the benedick does not caucus cornhusker and caucuses voluptuousness. sent3: something caucuses rescuer if it is a subsoil. sent4: either something is a subsoil or it is a Murrow or both if it does not admeasure jag. sent5: that something is not psychiatric but it does cover onychosis does not hold if it is not a sweeping. sent6: that the benedick caucuses cornhusker and it does caucus voluptuousness is false. sent7: that the benedick does not caucus cornhusker hold. sent8: the tentorium sweeps and does not caucus Ouse. sent9: the tentorium caucuses Ouse if the benedick does caucus cornhusker and does caucus voluptuousness. sent10: the tentorium is a sweeping. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the benedick does not caucus cornhusker but it caucuses voluptuousness.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the tentorium does caucus Ouse is not incorrect.; sent8 -> int2: the tentorium does not caucus Ouse.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__