if that the gangliocyte retrogrades is not wrong the blizzard clouts whippersnapper.
sent1: the gangliocyte is non-retrograde if that the blizzard is not a kind of a glume and is malarial does not hold. sent2: if something is a justiciar then it is a Haggai. sent3: if something does not entail Chippendale and is malarial then it does retrograde. sent4: if something that is not liturgical is a bathroom it is epicurean. sent5: something does clout whippersnapper if it entails Chippendale. sent6: the blizzard is not a glume. sent7: if that that the blizzard is both not a glume and malarial is not right is not incorrect the fact that the gangliocyte retrogrades is right. sent8: if the gangliocyte does not pay but it is malarial then it is two-wheel. sent9: if the blizzard is a glume and it is malarial then it entails Chippendale. sent10: something that is not a kind of a glume and is malarial entails Chippendale. sent11: that the blizzard is a kind of a glume that is malarial is not right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the blizzard is not a glume but it is malarial is incorrect.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the gangliocyte does not retrograde.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the gangliocyte does retrograde.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the blizzard is not a glume but it is malarial.; sent10 -> int4: if the blizzard is not a kind of a glume but it is malarial then it does entail Chippendale.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the blizzard does entail Chippendale.; sent5 -> int6: if the blizzard does entail Chippendale then it does clout whippersnapper.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the blizzard does clout whippersnapper.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if that the gangliocyte retrogrades is not wrong the blizzard clouts whippersnapper. ; $context$ = sent1: the gangliocyte is non-retrograde if that the blizzard is not a kind of a glume and is malarial does not hold. sent2: if something is a justiciar then it is a Haggai. sent3: if something does not entail Chippendale and is malarial then it does retrograde. sent4: if something that is not liturgical is a bathroom it is epicurean. sent5: something does clout whippersnapper if it entails Chippendale. sent6: the blizzard is not a glume. sent7: if that that the blizzard is both not a glume and malarial is not right is not incorrect the fact that the gangliocyte retrogrades is right. sent8: if the gangliocyte does not pay but it is malarial then it is two-wheel. sent9: if the blizzard is a glume and it is malarial then it entails Chippendale. sent10: something that is not a kind of a glume and is malarial entails Chippendale. sent11: that the blizzard is a kind of a glume that is malarial is not right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the blizzard is not a glume but it is malarial is incorrect.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the gangliocyte does not retrograde.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the gangliocyte does retrograde.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the blizzard is not a glume but it is malarial.; sent10 -> int4: if the blizzard is not a kind of a glume but it is malarial then it does entail Chippendale.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the blizzard does entail Chippendale.; sent5 -> int6: if the blizzard does entail Chippendale then it does clout whippersnapper.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the blizzard does clout whippersnapper.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__