the crayfish is saprobic.
sent1: if the siamang is appropriate then the goatsfoot interposes syndrome. sent2: the tamarillo is not azo. sent3: something is not saprobic if the fact that it is appropriate thing that does not interpose syndrome is not true. sent4: that something does appropriate but it does not interpose syndrome is not correct if it is not azo. sent5: the crayfish appropriates. sent6: the siamang does curb plainness. sent7: if something is corymbose then it is saprobic. sent8: the tamarillo is appropriate. sent9: if the siamang does not appropriate then the crayfish is corymbose and is appropriate. sent10: the tamarillo curbs plainness but it is not azo. sent11: the goatsfoot curbs plainness. sent12: the fact that the crayfish does appropriate and does not curb plainness is not right. sent13: if the goatsfoot interposes syndrome that the tamarillo does curb plainness and it is azo does not hold. sent14: the fact that the tamarillo curbs plainness and is azo does not hold. sent15: if something is saprobic the fact that it does appropriate is right. sent16: if the goatsfoot interposes syndrome that the tamarillo curbs plainness and is not azo is wrong. sent17: if that the goatsfoot is not corymbose is right then that the siamang curbs plainness and is azo is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the siamang is appropriate.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the goatsfoot does interpose syndrome.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: that the tamarillo does curb plainness but it is not azo is not correct.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the siamang is not appropriate.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the crayfish is corymbose and appropriate.; int5 -> int6: the crayfish is corymbose.; sent7 -> int7: if the crayfish is corymbose then it is saprobic.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis;
that the crayfish is not saprobic is right.
sent3 -> int8: the crayfish is not saprobic if that it is appropriate and it does not interpose syndrome is incorrect.; sent4 -> int9: the fact that the crayfish is appropriate thing that does not interpose syndrome is incorrect if that it is not azo is correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the crayfish is saprobic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the siamang is appropriate then the goatsfoot interposes syndrome. sent2: the tamarillo is not azo. sent3: something is not saprobic if the fact that it is appropriate thing that does not interpose syndrome is not true. sent4: that something does appropriate but it does not interpose syndrome is not correct if it is not azo. sent5: the crayfish appropriates. sent6: the siamang does curb plainness. sent7: if something is corymbose then it is saprobic. sent8: the tamarillo is appropriate. sent9: if the siamang does not appropriate then the crayfish is corymbose and is appropriate. sent10: the tamarillo curbs plainness but it is not azo. sent11: the goatsfoot curbs plainness. sent12: the fact that the crayfish does appropriate and does not curb plainness is not right. sent13: if the goatsfoot interposes syndrome that the tamarillo does curb plainness and it is azo does not hold. sent14: the fact that the tamarillo curbs plainness and is azo does not hold. sent15: if something is saprobic the fact that it does appropriate is right. sent16: if the goatsfoot interposes syndrome that the tamarillo curbs plainness and is not azo is wrong. sent17: if that the goatsfoot is not corymbose is right then that the siamang curbs plainness and is azo is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the siamang is appropriate.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the goatsfoot does interpose syndrome.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: that the tamarillo does curb plainness but it is not azo is not correct.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the siamang is not appropriate.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the crayfish is corymbose and appropriate.; int5 -> int6: the crayfish is corymbose.; sent7 -> int7: if the crayfish is corymbose then it is saprobic.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__