if the stifler is not calycular then that the eater does firebomb stepparent and is not a knitting is not true.
sent1: the eater knits if the stifler is calycular and does not firebomb stepparent. sent2: if the fact that the fact that something does not walk fettered and it is not probabilistic is true is not true then it is not a casing. sent3: that the yellowcake is not a slap but it does bone mug is wrong. sent4: if the eater firebombs stepparent and is not a knitting the stifler is calycular. sent5: that the stifler does not walk fettered and it is not probabilistic is not true if the grade is a proto-oncogene. sent6: the eater is calycular. sent7: if something is not a casing then the fact that it is both calycular and intestate is false. sent8: the turnspit is astringent and is not a knitting. sent9: if the eater is a knitting but it is not calycular then the stifler firebombs stepparent. sent10: the stifler does firebomb stepparent but it is not a knitting if the eater is not calycular. sent11: the eater does not walk labored. sent12: if there is something such that that it is not a slap and bones mug is not true then the grade is a kind of a proto-oncogene. sent13: an invalid is colloidal and is not a botanical. sent14: the eater does firebomb stepparent. sent15: the fact that the eater does firebomb stepparent but it is not a knitting is wrong if that the stifler is calycular is correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the eater does firebomb stepparent and is not a kind of a knitting.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the stifler is calycular.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the stifler is not calycular.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the eater does firebomb stepparent but it does not knit does not hold.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the eater is colloidal and is not a kind of a botanical.
sent13 -> int4: the eater is colloidal and is not a kind of a botanical if it does invalid.; sent7 -> int5: if the stifler is not a kind of a casing that it is calycular and intestate is wrong.; sent2 -> int6: if that the stifler does not walk fettered and is non-probabilistic is not true it is not a casing.; sent3 -> int7: there is something such that that it does not slap and bones mug is not correct.; int7 & sent12 -> int8: the grade is a kind of a proto-oncogene.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the fact that that the stifler does not walk fettered and it is not probabilistic does not hold is correct.; int6 & int9 -> int10: that the stifler is not a casing is not false.; int5 & int10 -> int11: that the stifler is calycular and is intestate is not right.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of calycular thing that is intestate is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = if the stifler is not calycular then that the eater does firebomb stepparent and is not a knitting is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the eater knits if the stifler is calycular and does not firebomb stepparent. sent2: if the fact that the fact that something does not walk fettered and it is not probabilistic is true is not true then it is not a casing. sent3: that the yellowcake is not a slap but it does bone mug is wrong. sent4: if the eater firebombs stepparent and is not a knitting the stifler is calycular. sent5: that the stifler does not walk fettered and it is not probabilistic is not true if the grade is a proto-oncogene. sent6: the eater is calycular. sent7: if something is not a casing then the fact that it is both calycular and intestate is false. sent8: the turnspit is astringent and is not a knitting. sent9: if the eater is a knitting but it is not calycular then the stifler firebombs stepparent. sent10: the stifler does firebomb stepparent but it is not a knitting if the eater is not calycular. sent11: the eater does not walk labored. sent12: if there is something such that that it is not a slap and bones mug is not true then the grade is a kind of a proto-oncogene. sent13: an invalid is colloidal and is not a botanical. sent14: the eater does firebomb stepparent. sent15: the fact that the eater does firebomb stepparent but it is not a knitting is wrong if that the stifler is calycular is correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the eater does firebomb stepparent and is not a kind of a knitting.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the stifler is calycular.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the stifler is not calycular.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the eater does firebomb stepparent but it does not knit does not hold.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__