the fact that if the crosscut repeats the enjoyer resents enjoyer is true.
sent1: the clingfilm resents enjoyer. sent2: the sheller does not jackrabbit. sent3: that the crosscut does not repeat or it is hydrophilic or both does not hold if the sheller is hydrophilic. sent4: the sheller resents enjoyer. sent5: the fact that the enjoyer resents enjoyer is right if that the sheller is not hydrophilic or a jackrabbit or both is not true. sent6: the sheller is a repeat if it is a jackrabbit. sent7: if that either the sheller is non-hydrophilic or it is a jackrabbit or both is not true then the crosscut resents enjoyer. sent8: the sheller is a teaspoon. sent9: the sheller is glottal. sent10: the sheller does not jackrabbit if the crosscut does jackrabbit. sent11: the sheller does repeat if that the fact that the crosscut is not a jackrabbit and/or it is hydrophilic does not hold is true. sent12: the crosscut is hydrophilic if the sheller jackrabbits. sent13: if that the crosscut is hydrophilic is true then the fact that the sheller is not a kind of a jackrabbit or it is hydrophilic or both is incorrect. sent14: if the crosscut is a jackrabbit then the fact that either the sheller is not hydrophilic or it is a jackrabbit or both is incorrect. sent15: something is a kind of a keratoscope if it repeats. sent16: the crosscut is a jackrabbit if it repeats. sent17: the esplanade jackrabbits.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the crosscut is a kind of a repeat.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the crosscut jackrabbits.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the fact that either the sheller is not hydrophilic or it is a jackrabbit or both is not true.; sent5 & int2 -> int3: the enjoyer resents enjoyer.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the meclizine is a keratoscope is correct if it repeats.
sent15 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the crosscut repeats the enjoyer resents enjoyer is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the clingfilm resents enjoyer. sent2: the sheller does not jackrabbit. sent3: that the crosscut does not repeat or it is hydrophilic or both does not hold if the sheller is hydrophilic. sent4: the sheller resents enjoyer. sent5: the fact that the enjoyer resents enjoyer is right if that the sheller is not hydrophilic or a jackrabbit or both is not true. sent6: the sheller is a repeat if it is a jackrabbit. sent7: if that either the sheller is non-hydrophilic or it is a jackrabbit or both is not true then the crosscut resents enjoyer. sent8: the sheller is a teaspoon. sent9: the sheller is glottal. sent10: the sheller does not jackrabbit if the crosscut does jackrabbit. sent11: the sheller does repeat if that the fact that the crosscut is not a jackrabbit and/or it is hydrophilic does not hold is true. sent12: the crosscut is hydrophilic if the sheller jackrabbits. sent13: if that the crosscut is hydrophilic is true then the fact that the sheller is not a kind of a jackrabbit or it is hydrophilic or both is incorrect. sent14: if the crosscut is a jackrabbit then the fact that either the sheller is not hydrophilic or it is a jackrabbit or both is incorrect. sent15: something is a kind of a keratoscope if it repeats. sent16: the crosscut is a jackrabbit if it repeats. sent17: the esplanade jackrabbits. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the crosscut is a kind of a repeat.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the crosscut jackrabbits.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the fact that either the sheller is not hydrophilic or it is a jackrabbit or both is not true.; sent5 & int2 -> int3: the enjoyer resents enjoyer.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__