the snailfish does not taste dahl.
sent1: that something does not taste anathema and/or is not a Jefferson does not hold if it is implicit. sent2: if the assemblyman is a tinkerer that it is not a anticyclone is not true. sent3: the assemblyman does not taste anathema and/or it is not a Jefferson if it does not retake. sent4: the powerbroker does not retake if the fact that it is a tinkerer but not polymeric does not hold. sent5: if the powerbroker is a anticyclone but it is not polymeric then the fact that the assemblyman is implicit hold. sent6: that something is not a retake and/or is not implicit does not hold if it tastes dahl. sent7: the assemblyman is not polymeric if the powerbroker is implicit. sent8: if the powerbroker is a tinkerer the assemblyman does not taste anathema. sent9: the powerbroker is a anticyclone but it is not polymeric if the snailfish tastes dahl. sent10: that the snailfish is not a kind of a Jefferson or does not truss Bigfoot or both is not right if it does taste dahl. sent11: if the snailfish is implicit the fact that it does not taste dahl and/or does not taste anathema is not right. sent12: the fact that the assemblyman trusses Bigfoot but it is not a kind of a tinkerer is not correct. sent13: if the assemblyman is a Jefferson but it is not a anticyclone then the powerbroker is a retake. sent14: the assemblyman is not a retake if the fact that it does truss Bigfoot and it is not a kind of a tinkerer is not correct. sent15: if something is not a Jefferson it does taste dahl and it is implicit. sent16: something does retake if it tastes dahl.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the snailfish does taste dahl.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the powerbroker is a kind of a anticyclone and is not polymeric.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the assemblyman is implicit.; sent1 -> int3: that the assemblyman does not taste anathema or it is not a Jefferson or both does not hold if it is implicit.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the assemblyman either does not taste anathema or is not a Jefferson or both is incorrect.; sent14 & sent12 -> int5: the assemblyman is not a retake.; sent3 & int5 -> int6: the assemblyman does not taste anathema and/or it is not a Jefferson.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the module is not a tinkerer.
sent15 -> int8: if the fact that the snailfish is not a kind of a Jefferson hold it does taste dahl and is implicit.;
$hypothesis$ = the snailfish does not taste dahl. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not taste anathema and/or is not a Jefferson does not hold if it is implicit. sent2: if the assemblyman is a tinkerer that it is not a anticyclone is not true. sent3: the assemblyman does not taste anathema and/or it is not a Jefferson if it does not retake. sent4: the powerbroker does not retake if the fact that it is a tinkerer but not polymeric does not hold. sent5: if the powerbroker is a anticyclone but it is not polymeric then the fact that the assemblyman is implicit hold. sent6: that something is not a retake and/or is not implicit does not hold if it tastes dahl. sent7: the assemblyman is not polymeric if the powerbroker is implicit. sent8: if the powerbroker is a tinkerer the assemblyman does not taste anathema. sent9: the powerbroker is a anticyclone but it is not polymeric if the snailfish tastes dahl. sent10: that the snailfish is not a kind of a Jefferson or does not truss Bigfoot or both is not right if it does taste dahl. sent11: if the snailfish is implicit the fact that it does not taste dahl and/or does not taste anathema is not right. sent12: the fact that the assemblyman trusses Bigfoot but it is not a kind of a tinkerer is not correct. sent13: if the assemblyman is a Jefferson but it is not a anticyclone then the powerbroker is a retake. sent14: the assemblyman is not a retake if the fact that it does truss Bigfoot and it is not a kind of a tinkerer is not correct. sent15: if something is not a Jefferson it does taste dahl and it is implicit. sent16: something does retake if it tastes dahl. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the snailfish does taste dahl.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the powerbroker is a kind of a anticyclone and is not polymeric.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the assemblyman is implicit.; sent1 -> int3: that the assemblyman does not taste anathema or it is not a Jefferson or both does not hold if it is implicit.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the assemblyman either does not taste anathema or is not a Jefferson or both is incorrect.; sent14 & sent12 -> int5: the assemblyman is not a retake.; sent3 & int5 -> int6: the assemblyman does not taste anathema and/or it is not a Jefferson.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__