the Jezebel does not watch but it is a Botrychium.
sent1: the fornication is an accuser. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is percussive is true the Jezebel is unbroken. sent3: the pelisse is not a plosion if it is erect. sent4: the Jezebel does contour if the fornication is a kind of an accuser but it does not contour. sent5: the Jezebel is a Botrychium if it is a contour. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is not percussive and not a plosion does not hold. sent7: something is not a watch if it is unbroken. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is percussive and it is not a kind of a plosion is not correct. sent9: the jay is not a contour. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it is not percussive and it is a kind of a plosion is false. sent11: the fornication is an accuser but it is not a kind of a contour. sent12: the fact that the indentation is both not a contour and not percussive is incorrect if it is not a plosion. sent13: the fact that the fornication is unbroken is right if there exists something such that that it is not an accuser and it is not a contour is not true. sent14: the indentation is not a plosion but an accuser. sent15: if something is not unbroken that it is not a watch and it is a Botrychium is false. sent16: if there is something such that the fact that that it is not percussive and it is not a plosion is not wrong is not correct then the Jezebel is unbroken.
sent7 -> int1: if the Jezebel is unbroken then it is not a kind of a watch.; sent6 & sent16 -> int2: the Jezebel is not broken.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Jezebel is not a kind of a watch.; sent4 & sent11 -> int4: the Jezebel is a contour.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the Jezebel is a Botrychium.; int3 & int5 -> hypothesis;
that the Jezebel is not a kind of a watch and is a Botrychium is not right.
sent15 -> int6: that the Jezebel is not a watch but it is a Botrychium is incorrect if it is not unbroken.; sent14 -> int7: the indentation is not a plosion.; sent12 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the indentation is not a contour and is not percussive is not correct.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that that it is both not a contour and not percussive does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the Jezebel does not watch but it is a Botrychium. ; $context$ = sent1: the fornication is an accuser. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is percussive is true the Jezebel is unbroken. sent3: the pelisse is not a plosion if it is erect. sent4: the Jezebel does contour if the fornication is a kind of an accuser but it does not contour. sent5: the Jezebel is a Botrychium if it is a contour. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is not percussive and not a plosion does not hold. sent7: something is not a watch if it is unbroken. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is percussive and it is not a kind of a plosion is not correct. sent9: the jay is not a contour. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it is not percussive and it is a kind of a plosion is false. sent11: the fornication is an accuser but it is not a kind of a contour. sent12: the fact that the indentation is both not a contour and not percussive is incorrect if it is not a plosion. sent13: the fact that the fornication is unbroken is right if there exists something such that that it is not an accuser and it is not a contour is not true. sent14: the indentation is not a plosion but an accuser. sent15: if something is not unbroken that it is not a watch and it is a Botrychium is false. sent16: if there is something such that the fact that that it is not percussive and it is not a plosion is not wrong is not correct then the Jezebel is unbroken. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: if the Jezebel is unbroken then it is not a kind of a watch.; sent6 & sent16 -> int2: the Jezebel is not broken.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Jezebel is not a kind of a watch.; sent4 & sent11 -> int4: the Jezebel is a contour.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the Jezebel is a Botrychium.; int3 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__