the icecream is not a Midwest.
sent1: if the fact that something vexes shipway is correct then the fact that it is supernaturalist and it is not subsonic is false. sent2: the icecream is not a Midwest if the hag is subsonic. sent3: there exists something such that it is polygonal and it is a contemptuousness. sent4: the silks is not a desorption. sent5: that that the shipway is a cavetto and does demonstrate is not correct hold. sent6: that the shipway is a kind of a cavetto and demonstrates does not hold if the speakerphone is a cavetto. sent7: the RV is a desorption. sent8: there is something such that that it is a desorption is correct. sent9: if something vexes shipway then that it is supernaturalist and it is subsonic does not hold. sent10: if the fact that the hag is supernaturalist but it is not subsonic is not true that the icecream is not a Midwest hold. sent11: if the speakerphone is a Midwest the icecream is a Midwest. sent12: if the shipway is not a kind of a contemptuousness the speakerphone is polygonal and is a Midwest. sent13: something is a contemptuousness. sent14: that the speakerphone is a desorption is right if there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-polygonal and it is a contemptuousness is correct. sent15: the fact that the hag is supernaturalist and subsonic is wrong. sent16: that the shipway is not a cavetto and does demonstrate is false if the speakerphone is a cavetto. sent17: the hag does vex shipway if that the shipway is not a cavetto and does demonstrate is not right. sent18: the fact that the hag is both supernaturalist and subsonic is incorrect if it does vex shipway. sent19: something is polygonal. sent20: the hag does vex shipway if the shipway is a cavetto. sent21: the icecream is a cavetto if something is a Midwest and it is a desorption. sent22: the shipway is not a cavetto if it is not a kind of a cavetto or it is not subsonic or both. sent23: if something is not a cavetto and is not a desorption that it is not a contemptuousness is correct. sent24: the fact that that the speakerphone is not a kind of a cavetto and is a desorption does not hold is correct if there is something such that it is not a desorption.
sent3 & sent14 -> int1: the speakerphone is a desorption.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the speakerphone is not a kind of a cavetto.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the speakerphone is not a cavetto but it is a desorption.; sent4 -> int3: there is something such that it is not a desorption.; int3 & sent24 -> int4: that the speakerphone is not a cavetto and is a desorption does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the speakerphone is a kind of a cavetto hold.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: that the shipway is not a cavetto but it does demonstrate does not hold.; int7 & sent17 -> int8: the hag vexes shipway.; sent1 -> int9: that the hag is supernaturalist thing that is not subsonic is wrong if it does vex shipway.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the hag is not non-supernaturalist but it is not subsonic does not hold.; int10 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the icecream is a Midwest.
sent23 -> int11: if the shipway is not a kind of a cavetto and it is not a kind of a desorption it is not a kind of a contemptuousness.;
$hypothesis$ = the icecream is not a Midwest. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something vexes shipway is correct then the fact that it is supernaturalist and it is not subsonic is false. sent2: the icecream is not a Midwest if the hag is subsonic. sent3: there exists something such that it is polygonal and it is a contemptuousness. sent4: the silks is not a desorption. sent5: that that the shipway is a cavetto and does demonstrate is not correct hold. sent6: that the shipway is a kind of a cavetto and demonstrates does not hold if the speakerphone is a cavetto. sent7: the RV is a desorption. sent8: there is something such that that it is a desorption is correct. sent9: if something vexes shipway then that it is supernaturalist and it is subsonic does not hold. sent10: if the fact that the hag is supernaturalist but it is not subsonic is not true that the icecream is not a Midwest hold. sent11: if the speakerphone is a Midwest the icecream is a Midwest. sent12: if the shipway is not a kind of a contemptuousness the speakerphone is polygonal and is a Midwest. sent13: something is a contemptuousness. sent14: that the speakerphone is a desorption is right if there exists something such that the fact that it is not non-polygonal and it is a contemptuousness is correct. sent15: the fact that the hag is supernaturalist and subsonic is wrong. sent16: that the shipway is not a cavetto and does demonstrate is false if the speakerphone is a cavetto. sent17: the hag does vex shipway if that the shipway is not a cavetto and does demonstrate is not right. sent18: the fact that the hag is both supernaturalist and subsonic is incorrect if it does vex shipway. sent19: something is polygonal. sent20: the hag does vex shipway if the shipway is a cavetto. sent21: the icecream is a cavetto if something is a Midwest and it is a desorption. sent22: the shipway is not a cavetto if it is not a kind of a cavetto or it is not subsonic or both. sent23: if something is not a cavetto and is not a desorption that it is not a contemptuousness is correct. sent24: the fact that that the speakerphone is not a kind of a cavetto and is a desorption does not hold is correct if there is something such that it is not a desorption. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 & sent14 -> int1: the speakerphone is a desorption.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the speakerphone is not a kind of a cavetto.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the speakerphone is not a cavetto but it is a desorption.; sent4 -> int3: there is something such that it is not a desorption.; int3 & sent24 -> int4: that the speakerphone is not a cavetto and is a desorption does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the speakerphone is a kind of a cavetto hold.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: that the shipway is not a cavetto but it does demonstrate does not hold.; int7 & sent17 -> int8: the hag vexes shipway.; sent1 -> int9: that the hag is supernaturalist thing that is not subsonic is wrong if it does vex shipway.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the hag is not non-supernaturalist but it is not subsonic does not hold.; int10 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__