if the nanomia is geriatrics then the fact that the Benjamin horns Benjamin is right.
sent1: that the agama is a trunk but it does not embrown Talmud is wrong. sent2: if the chine does horn Benjamin the Benjamin is a patency. sent3: if the nanomia is not geriatrics the fact that the ecstasy is both Dorian and not geriatrics does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a trunk is not incorrect. sent5: if the fact that the chine is a patency but not Dorian is not right then the nanomia is not geriatrics. sent6: if the ecstasy is not a kind of a Dorian then the fact that the fact that the chine is a kind of a patency and is Dorian is not right is true. sent7: that something is not a kind of a Dorian and embrowns Talmud is true. sent8: if something that is not a trunk does not embrown Talmud then that the ecstasy is not a kind of a Dorian hold. sent9: if the ecstasy is not a Dorian then that the chine is a patency and not a Dorian does not hold. sent10: that the chine is a patency and Dorian is not right. sent11: the nanomia is a Dorian if the chine is geriatrics. sent12: the nanomia is geriatrics if the fact that the chine is both a patency and not Dorian is not correct.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the nanomia is geriatrics.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the agama is not a kind of a trunk and it does not embrown Talmud.; assump1 -> int1: something is not a trunk and does not embrown Talmud.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the ecstasy is not a Dorian.; sent9 & int2 -> int3: that the chine is a patency but it is not a Dorian is not true.; sent5 & int3 -> int4: that the nanomia is not geriatrics is not wrong.; assump2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the fact that the agama is not a kind of a trunk and does not embrown Talmud hold does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = if the nanomia is geriatrics then the fact that the Benjamin horns Benjamin is right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the agama is a trunk but it does not embrown Talmud is wrong. sent2: if the chine does horn Benjamin the Benjamin is a patency. sent3: if the nanomia is not geriatrics the fact that the ecstasy is both Dorian and not geriatrics does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a trunk is not incorrect. sent5: if the fact that the chine is a patency but not Dorian is not right then the nanomia is not geriatrics. sent6: if the ecstasy is not a kind of a Dorian then the fact that the fact that the chine is a kind of a patency and is Dorian is not right is true. sent7: that something is not a kind of a Dorian and embrowns Talmud is true. sent8: if something that is not a trunk does not embrown Talmud then that the ecstasy is not a kind of a Dorian hold. sent9: if the ecstasy is not a Dorian then that the chine is a patency and not a Dorian does not hold. sent10: that the chine is a patency and Dorian is not right. sent11: the nanomia is a Dorian if the chine is geriatrics. sent12: the nanomia is geriatrics if the fact that the chine is both a patency and not Dorian is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the nanomia is geriatrics.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the agama is not a kind of a trunk and it does not embrown Talmud.; assump1 -> int1: something is not a trunk and does not embrown Talmud.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the ecstasy is not a Dorian.; sent9 & int2 -> int3: that the chine is a patency but it is not a Dorian is not true.; sent5 & int3 -> int4: that the nanomia is not geriatrics is not wrong.; assump2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the fact that the agama is not a kind of a trunk and does not embrown Talmud hold does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__