the bowl is not intelligent.
sent1: the fact that the bowl is a kind of a harmonic is correct. sent2: if something unpicks grindstone and/or it is not non-cenogenetic it is not intelligent. sent3: if something is not a kind of a levy then it is not a corncrake and it winnows knowledgeability. sent4: if the bowl is uppercase that it is not fingerless is not incorrect. sent5: the fact that the bowl is not nonintellectual is right if it is a kind of a pyrimidine. sent6: the bowl is a pyrimidine if it does not bog Wheeler. sent7: the bowl does not bog Wheeler. sent8: the redoubt is cenogenetic. sent9: something does not bog hydrocarbon if it bogs sclerometer and/or it is a kind of a barren. sent10: The Wheeler does not bog bowl. sent11: something that is not a kind of a nevirapine is not honest. sent12: something is not an allergist but nonintellectual if it is not cenogenetic. sent13: if the fact that the hydrocarbon is cenogenetic is right then it is not a kind of a buddleia. sent14: that the bowl is not auxetic if the bowl does normalize is true. sent15: the bowl does not broaden.
sent12 -> int1: if the bowl is not cenogenetic it is both not an allergist and nonintellectual.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bowl is not cenogenetic.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the bowl is not an allergist but nonintellectual.; int2 -> int3: the bowl is nonintellectual.; sent6 & sent7 -> int4: the bowl is a kind of a pyrimidine.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the bowl is not nonintellectual.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the bowl is cenogenetic.; int7 -> int8: the bowl unpicks grindstone and/or is cenogenetic.; sent2 -> int9: that if the bowl does unpick grindstone and/or is cenogenetic then that the bowl is not intelligent is right is not false.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the bowl is not intelligent. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the bowl is a kind of a harmonic is correct. sent2: if something unpicks grindstone and/or it is not non-cenogenetic it is not intelligent. sent3: if something is not a kind of a levy then it is not a corncrake and it winnows knowledgeability. sent4: if the bowl is uppercase that it is not fingerless is not incorrect. sent5: the fact that the bowl is not nonintellectual is right if it is a kind of a pyrimidine. sent6: the bowl is a pyrimidine if it does not bog Wheeler. sent7: the bowl does not bog Wheeler. sent8: the redoubt is cenogenetic. sent9: something does not bog hydrocarbon if it bogs sclerometer and/or it is a kind of a barren. sent10: The Wheeler does not bog bowl. sent11: something that is not a kind of a nevirapine is not honest. sent12: something is not an allergist but nonintellectual if it is not cenogenetic. sent13: if the fact that the hydrocarbon is cenogenetic is right then it is not a kind of a buddleia. sent14: that the bowl is not auxetic if the bowl does normalize is true. sent15: the bowl does not broaden. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: if the bowl is not cenogenetic it is both not an allergist and nonintellectual.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bowl is not cenogenetic.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the bowl is not an allergist but nonintellectual.; int2 -> int3: the bowl is nonintellectual.; sent6 & sent7 -> int4: the bowl is a kind of a pyrimidine.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the bowl is not nonintellectual.; int3 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the bowl is cenogenetic.; int7 -> int8: the bowl unpicks grindstone and/or is cenogenetic.; sent2 -> int9: that if the bowl does unpick grindstone and/or is cenogenetic then that the bowl is not intelligent is right is not false.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__