the squawbush is an official.
sent1: the perspiration does not tweak if that the jersey is not a Drambuie and does not federalize Rostand is incorrect. sent2: that the jersey is not a Drambuie and it does not federalize Rostand does not hold. sent3: that the phenyltoloxamine does not federalize Rostand hold. sent4: the squawbush is official if the perspiration is both not a cubist and not gyroscopic. sent5: if there exists something such that it is not homiletics the perspiration is not cubist. sent6: if the jersey is homiletics but it is not unargumentative then the mescal is homiletics. sent7: if the perspiration is unargumentative and it is gyroscopic then the phenyltoloxamine is not a sawmill. sent8: something is unargumentative if it does not tweak. sent9: the phenyltoloxamine is a sawmill and not voltaic. sent10: the haircut is not homiletics.
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the perspiration does not tweak.; sent8 -> int2: if the perspiration does not tweak it is unargumentative.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the perspiration is unargumentative.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the perspiration is gyroscopic.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the perspiration is unargumentative and it is gyroscopic.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the phenyltoloxamine is not a sawmill.; sent9 -> int6: the phenyltoloxamine is a sawmill.; int5 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the perspiration is not gyroscopic.; sent10 -> int9: there is something such that it is not homiletics.; int9 & sent5 -> int10: the perspiration is not a kind of a cubist.; int8 & int10 -> int11: the perspiration is a kind of non-cubist thing that is not gyroscopic.; int11 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the mescal is homiletics.
$hypothesis$ = the squawbush is an official. ; $context$ = sent1: the perspiration does not tweak if that the jersey is not a Drambuie and does not federalize Rostand is incorrect. sent2: that the jersey is not a Drambuie and it does not federalize Rostand does not hold. sent3: that the phenyltoloxamine does not federalize Rostand hold. sent4: the squawbush is official if the perspiration is both not a cubist and not gyroscopic. sent5: if there exists something such that it is not homiletics the perspiration is not cubist. sent6: if the jersey is homiletics but it is not unargumentative then the mescal is homiletics. sent7: if the perspiration is unargumentative and it is gyroscopic then the phenyltoloxamine is not a sawmill. sent8: something is unargumentative if it does not tweak. sent9: the phenyltoloxamine is a sawmill and not voltaic. sent10: the haircut is not homiletics. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the perspiration does not tweak.; sent8 -> int2: if the perspiration does not tweak it is unargumentative.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the perspiration is unargumentative.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the perspiration is gyroscopic.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the perspiration is unargumentative and it is gyroscopic.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the phenyltoloxamine is not a sawmill.; sent9 -> int6: the phenyltoloxamine is a sawmill.; int5 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the perspiration is not gyroscopic.; sent10 -> int9: there is something such that it is not homiletics.; int9 & sent5 -> int10: the perspiration is not a kind of a cubist.; int8 & int10 -> int11: the perspiration is a kind of non-cubist thing that is not gyroscopic.; int11 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__