the hagfish catapults Raffia.
sent1: the elitist is bacillar. sent2: something is not ferial if the fact that it is non-Sabahan thing that is a choc-ice is not right. sent3: the elitist is bacillar and an addict. sent4: if that something does not haggle and is a malice does not hold then it is not a kind of an addict. sent5: if the methanol does not haggle but it is a kind of a malice then the hagfish catapults Raffia. sent6: the fact that the elitist is not bacillar but it is an addict is incorrect if the Anjou is not a kind of a pint. sent7: if the methanol is not a malice then the fact that it is not an addict is correct. sent8: the methanol does addict if the elitist is an addict.
sent4 -> int1: the methanol is not an addict if that it is not a haggle but a malice does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the fact that the methanol is not a haggle and is a malice hold is not correct.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the methanol does not addict.; sent3 -> int3: the elitist is an addict.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the methanol does addict.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the methanol does not haggle but it is a malice.; int6 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the hagfish does not catapult Raffia.
$hypothesis$ = the hagfish catapults Raffia. ; $context$ = sent1: the elitist is bacillar. sent2: something is not ferial if the fact that it is non-Sabahan thing that is a choc-ice is not right. sent3: the elitist is bacillar and an addict. sent4: if that something does not haggle and is a malice does not hold then it is not a kind of an addict. sent5: if the methanol does not haggle but it is a kind of a malice then the hagfish catapults Raffia. sent6: the fact that the elitist is not bacillar but it is an addict is incorrect if the Anjou is not a kind of a pint. sent7: if the methanol is not a malice then the fact that it is not an addict is correct. sent8: the methanol does addict if the elitist is an addict. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: the methanol is not an addict if that it is not a haggle but a malice does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the fact that the methanol is not a haggle and is a malice hold is not correct.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the methanol does not addict.; sent3 -> int3: the elitist is an addict.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the methanol does addict.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the methanol does not haggle but it is a malice.; int6 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__