that the fact that the Sheraton is a bedspread and articles impartiality is correct is false.
sent1: something that does not parse stint and/or does article archpriest calcimines. sent2: if the fact that the hanger does not parse stint and/or it does article archpriest is wrong the Sheraton does not parse hanger. sent3: if something is a kind of a calcimine and/or it is a kind of a frontlet then it is not a clickety-clack. sent4: something does article impartiality if that it is not a kind of a frontlet and does not calcimine is incorrect. sent5: the hanger is a clickety-clack. sent6: the Sheraton is a bedspread. sent7: that the fact that something is a bedspread that does article impartiality is not incorrect is wrong if it does not parse hanger.
sent1 -> int1: if the hanger does not parse stint and/or does article archpriest then it is a calcimine.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hanger does not parse stint and/or it does article archpriest.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the hanger is a calcimine.; int2 -> int3: the hanger is a calcimine and/or a frontlet.; sent3 -> int4: that if the hanger calcimines and/or is the frontlet then the hanger is not a clickety-clack is true.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the hanger is not a kind of a clickety-clack.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that either the hanger does not parse stint or it does article archpriest or both is wrong.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: the Sheraton does not parse hanger.; sent7 -> int9: if the Sheraton does not parse hanger then the fact that it is a bedspread and articles impartiality is incorrect.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis;
the Sheraton is a bedspread and it articles impartiality.
sent4 -> int10: if the fact that the Sheraton is not a kind of a frontlet and it is not a kind of a calcimine is incorrect then it does article impartiality.;
$hypothesis$ = that the fact that the Sheraton is a bedspread and articles impartiality is correct is false. ; $context$ = sent1: something that does not parse stint and/or does article archpriest calcimines. sent2: if the fact that the hanger does not parse stint and/or it does article archpriest is wrong the Sheraton does not parse hanger. sent3: if something is a kind of a calcimine and/or it is a kind of a frontlet then it is not a clickety-clack. sent4: something does article impartiality if that it is not a kind of a frontlet and does not calcimine is incorrect. sent5: the hanger is a clickety-clack. sent6: the Sheraton is a bedspread. sent7: that the fact that something is a bedspread that does article impartiality is not incorrect is wrong if it does not parse hanger. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> int1: if the hanger does not parse stint and/or does article archpriest then it is a calcimine.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hanger does not parse stint and/or it does article archpriest.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the hanger is a calcimine.; int2 -> int3: the hanger is a calcimine and/or a frontlet.; sent3 -> int4: that if the hanger calcimines and/or is the frontlet then the hanger is not a clickety-clack is true.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the hanger is not a kind of a clickety-clack.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that either the hanger does not parse stint or it does article archpriest or both is wrong.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: the Sheraton does not parse hanger.; sent7 -> int9: if the Sheraton does not parse hanger then the fact that it is a bedspread and articles impartiality is incorrect.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__