there is something such that if it is not non-sportive it is electrochemical.
sent1: if something that does not orchestrate FAA is sportive then it is nectar-rich. sent2: the moorfowl is a mayeng and/or it is sportive if it is not nectar-rich. sent3: there is something such that if it blinkers Transportation that it is a kind of a dexamethasone is not incorrect. sent4: The FAA does not orchestrate moorfowl. sent5: if something is nectar-rich then it is electrochemical. sent6: if something is not a Calvinist and is articular it does burglarize Caravaggio. sent7: the moorfowl does not orchestrate FAA.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the moorfowl is sportive.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the moorfowl does not orchestrate FAA and is sportive.; sent1 -> int2: if the moorfowl does not orchestrate FAA and is sportive the fact that it is nectar-rich is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the moorfowl is nectar-rich.; sent5 -> int4: if the fact that the moorfowl is nectar-rich is correct then it is electrochemical.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the moorfowl is not non-electrochemical.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the moorfowl is electrochemical if it is sportive.; int6 -> hypothesis;
the Cairene is not a mayeng but it is not non-serious.
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not non-sportive it is electrochemical. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that does not orchestrate FAA is sportive then it is nectar-rich. sent2: the moorfowl is a mayeng and/or it is sportive if it is not nectar-rich. sent3: there is something such that if it blinkers Transportation that it is a kind of a dexamethasone is not incorrect. sent4: The FAA does not orchestrate moorfowl. sent5: if something is nectar-rich then it is electrochemical. sent6: if something is not a Calvinist and is articular it does burglarize Caravaggio. sent7: the moorfowl does not orchestrate FAA. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the moorfowl is sportive.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the moorfowl does not orchestrate FAA and is sportive.; sent1 -> int2: if the moorfowl does not orchestrate FAA and is sportive the fact that it is nectar-rich is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the moorfowl is nectar-rich.; sent5 -> int4: if the fact that the moorfowl is nectar-rich is correct then it is electrochemical.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the moorfowl is not non-electrochemical.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the moorfowl is electrochemical if it is sportive.; int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__