the fact that the pekoe is a kind of a sunburn and does not prophesy is not correct.
sent1: the sandwort is a kind of a enterotoxemia if it eventuates. sent2: the maker is a sunburn if the pekoe is a Onagraceae. sent3: the Champagne is a temazepam. sent4: that the Champagne is Appalachian and is a Onagraceae is incorrect. sent5: if the Champagne is a kind of a Kyoto it is a sunburn. sent6: that the pekoe sunburns and does not prophesy is not right if the Champagne sunburns. sent7: if there are acinar things then the Champagne is not a Chennai. sent8: if the fact that something is a enterotoxemia and it is untruthful is false then it is not a enterotoxemia. sent9: the pekoe does not eventuate if it is not a enterotoxemia. sent10: if the fact that something does not disavow sandwort and is an armiger does not hold then it is a kind of a Punjabi. sent11: there is something such that it is a Chennai. sent12: there is something such that it is not a mass. sent13: if that the maker is not a Onagraceae hold then the fact that the fact that the Champagne is both a Appalachian and a Onagraceae is not true is right. sent14: if that something is a kind of non-Appalachian a Onagraceae is wrong then it is a Kyoto. sent15: the sandwort does eventuate if the maker is a Onagraceae. sent16: something is a Onagraceae and a sunburn if it does not eventuate. sent17: the sandwort is not a enterotoxemia if something is a kind of a Chennai. sent18: if there exists something such that it is not a mass then that the pekoe is a enterotoxemia that is untruthful is not true. sent19: the fact that the Champagne is not a Appalachian and is a Onagraceae is wrong if the maker is not a Onagraceae. sent20: something is a Kyoto if it is a Appalachian. sent21: the vulcanization is inflationary. sent22: that the Champagne is a kind of a Kyoto is correct if it is Appalachian. sent23: if there is something such that it is a enterotoxemia the sandwort is not a Onagraceae. sent24: something does not prophesy if that it is a Kyoto that is Appalachian is not correct. sent25: the maker brands. sent26: the fact that the sandwort is a kind of a enterotoxemia that is not a sunburn does not hold if the pekoe is a enterotoxemia.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the maker is a Onagraceae.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the sandwort eventuates.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the sandwort is a enterotoxemia.; sent11 & sent17 -> int3: the sandwort is not a kind of a enterotoxemia.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the maker is not a Onagraceae.; int5 & sent19 -> int6: the fact that the Champagne is a kind of non-Appalachian thing that is a kind of a Onagraceae does not hold.; sent14 -> int7: if that the Champagne is not a Appalachian but it is a kind of a Onagraceae is false then it is a Kyoto.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the Champagne is a Kyoto.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the Champagne sunburns.; int9 & sent6 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the pekoe is a sunburn that does not prophesy is true.
sent16 -> int10: the pekoe is a Onagraceae and a sunburn if it does not eventuate.; sent8 -> int11: if the fact that the pekoe is a enterotoxemia and is untruthful is false it is not a enterotoxemia.; sent12 & sent18 -> int12: the fact that the pekoe is a enterotoxemia and it is untruthful is wrong.; int11 & int12 -> int13: the pekoe is not a enterotoxemia.; sent9 & int13 -> int14: the pekoe does not eventuate.; int10 & int14 -> int15: the pekoe is a Onagraceae and it is a sunburn.; int15 -> int16: the pekoe does sunburn.; sent24 -> int17: the fact that the pekoe does not prophesy is true if that it is a Kyoto and Appalachian is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the pekoe is a kind of a sunburn and does not prophesy is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the sandwort is a kind of a enterotoxemia if it eventuates. sent2: the maker is a sunburn if the pekoe is a Onagraceae. sent3: the Champagne is a temazepam. sent4: that the Champagne is Appalachian and is a Onagraceae is incorrect. sent5: if the Champagne is a kind of a Kyoto it is a sunburn. sent6: that the pekoe sunburns and does not prophesy is not right if the Champagne sunburns. sent7: if there are acinar things then the Champagne is not a Chennai. sent8: if the fact that something is a enterotoxemia and it is untruthful is false then it is not a enterotoxemia. sent9: the pekoe does not eventuate if it is not a enterotoxemia. sent10: if the fact that something does not disavow sandwort and is an armiger does not hold then it is a kind of a Punjabi. sent11: there is something such that it is a Chennai. sent12: there is something such that it is not a mass. sent13: if that the maker is not a Onagraceae hold then the fact that the fact that the Champagne is both a Appalachian and a Onagraceae is not true is right. sent14: if that something is a kind of non-Appalachian a Onagraceae is wrong then it is a Kyoto. sent15: the sandwort does eventuate if the maker is a Onagraceae. sent16: something is a Onagraceae and a sunburn if it does not eventuate. sent17: the sandwort is not a enterotoxemia if something is a kind of a Chennai. sent18: if there exists something such that it is not a mass then that the pekoe is a enterotoxemia that is untruthful is not true. sent19: the fact that the Champagne is not a Appalachian and is a Onagraceae is wrong if the maker is not a Onagraceae. sent20: something is a Kyoto if it is a Appalachian. sent21: the vulcanization is inflationary. sent22: that the Champagne is a kind of a Kyoto is correct if it is Appalachian. sent23: if there is something such that it is a enterotoxemia the sandwort is not a Onagraceae. sent24: something does not prophesy if that it is a Kyoto that is Appalachian is not correct. sent25: the maker brands. sent26: the fact that the sandwort is a kind of a enterotoxemia that is not a sunburn does not hold if the pekoe is a enterotoxemia. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the maker is a Onagraceae.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the sandwort eventuates.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the sandwort is a enterotoxemia.; sent11 & sent17 -> int3: the sandwort is not a kind of a enterotoxemia.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the maker is not a Onagraceae.; int5 & sent19 -> int6: the fact that the Champagne is a kind of non-Appalachian thing that is a kind of a Onagraceae does not hold.; sent14 -> int7: if that the Champagne is not a Appalachian but it is a kind of a Onagraceae is false then it is a Kyoto.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the Champagne is a Kyoto.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the Champagne sunburns.; int9 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__