that the corsair is a flophouse and it does exalt eutrophication is not true if the councilwoman does not agree.
sent1: there is nothing such that it is an advocacy and it is dendritic. sent2: if the councilwoman is dendritic it agrees. sent3: if there is something such that it is not dendritic then the fact that the councilwoman is a flophouse but it does not agree is wrong. sent4: that the effect is dendritic and polytheistic is not right. sent5: that the corsair does exalt eutrophication and is pharyngeal does not hold. sent6: the corsair is a kind of a flophouse and it does exalt eutrophication if the councilwoman is not dendritic. sent7: the fact that the corsair is a kind of a flophouse that exalts eutrophication is not correct if the councilwoman is not dendritic. sent8: if the councilwoman does agree that the corsair is a kind of a flophouse and it exalts eutrophication is not true. sent9: the corsair is a kind of a flophouse and it exalts eutrophication if the councilwoman does not agree.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the councilwoman is dendritic.; sent2 & assump2 -> int1: the councilwoman does agree.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the councilwoman does not agree.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the councilwoman is not dendritic.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: that the corsair is a kind of a flophouse that exalts eutrophication is not true.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the forklift is a kind of a flophouse.
sent1 -> int5: the fact that that the testudo is a kind of an advocacy and is dendritic is wrong hold.;
$hypothesis$ = that the corsair is a flophouse and it does exalt eutrophication is not true if the councilwoman does not agree. ; $context$ = sent1: there is nothing such that it is an advocacy and it is dendritic. sent2: if the councilwoman is dendritic it agrees. sent3: if there is something such that it is not dendritic then the fact that the councilwoman is a flophouse but it does not agree is wrong. sent4: that the effect is dendritic and polytheistic is not right. sent5: that the corsair does exalt eutrophication and is pharyngeal does not hold. sent6: the corsair is a kind of a flophouse and it does exalt eutrophication if the councilwoman is not dendritic. sent7: the fact that the corsair is a kind of a flophouse that exalts eutrophication is not correct if the councilwoman is not dendritic. sent8: if the councilwoman does agree that the corsair is a kind of a flophouse and it exalts eutrophication is not true. sent9: the corsair is a kind of a flophouse and it exalts eutrophication if the councilwoman does not agree. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the councilwoman is dendritic.; sent2 & assump2 -> int1: the councilwoman does agree.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the councilwoman does not agree.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the councilwoman is not dendritic.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: that the corsair is a kind of a flophouse that exalts eutrophication is not true.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__