the bull's-eye is not clitoral.
sent1: if the bull's-eye does not glamorize electric but it is a ileostomy the ex-mayor does concretize use. sent2: there exists nothing that is an autobiography that does concretize tisane. sent3: the ex-mayor is not an anklebone. sent4: if something is both not an anklebone and not clitoral then it does not concretize use. sent5: the bull's-eye is a haggler and it is obligatory if the ex-mayor does not concretize tisane. sent6: the ex-mayor is an anklebone if it does concretize use. sent7: that the bull's-eye is a ileostomy is true. sent8: if the fact that something is obligatory and it does strike rut does not hold then it does not strike rut. sent9: the bull's-eye is a kind of a notation. sent10: something is not an anklebone if it maddens Sphecidae and it is not a kind of a captain. sent11: the fact that if something does not madden Sphecidae it is not an anklebone and not clitoral is not wrong. sent12: if the bull's-eye is not a kind of a ileostomy it is not clitoral. sent13: if the bull's-eye is not a haggler that it is obligatory and it strikes rut is incorrect. sent14: the ex-mayor is not a ileostomy. sent15: something maddens Sphecidae and is not a captain if the fact that it does not strike rut is true. sent16: if the fact that the ex-mayor is an autobiography and it does concretize tisane is not true it does not concretize tisane. sent17: the ex-mayor does not glamorize electric if that it is not a kind of an anklebone and it is a ileostomy is not true. sent18: that if the fact that something is not an anklebone is not wrong then the fact that it is non-clitoral thing that concretizes use is wrong is not false. sent19: the bull's-eye is not clitoral if the fact that it does not glamorize electric and it is a ileostomy is wrong. sent20: that something is a captain but it does not strike rut is not true if it is obligatory. sent21: if the fact that something is a kind of non-clitoral thing that does concretize use is wrong that it is clitoral is correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bull's-eye does not glamorize electric but it is a ileostomy.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the ex-mayor concretizes use.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the ex-mayor is an anklebone.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the bull's-eye does not glamorize electric and is a ileostomy is not true.; int4 & sent19 -> hypothesis;
the bull's-eye is clitoral.
sent21 -> int5: if that the bull's-eye is a kind of non-clitoral thing that does concretize use does not hold then it is clitoral.; sent18 -> int6: if the fact that the bull's-eye is not an anklebone is not wrong then that it is not clitoral and does concretize use is false.; sent10 -> int7: the bull's-eye is not a kind of an anklebone if the fact that it does madden Sphecidae and is not a kind of a captain is not incorrect.; sent15 -> int8: if the bull's-eye does not strike rut it does madden Sphecidae and it is not a kind of a captain.; sent8 -> int9: the bull's-eye does not strike rut if the fact that it is obligatory and does strike rut does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the bull's-eye is not clitoral. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bull's-eye does not glamorize electric but it is a ileostomy the ex-mayor does concretize use. sent2: there exists nothing that is an autobiography that does concretize tisane. sent3: the ex-mayor is not an anklebone. sent4: if something is both not an anklebone and not clitoral then it does not concretize use. sent5: the bull's-eye is a haggler and it is obligatory if the ex-mayor does not concretize tisane. sent6: the ex-mayor is an anklebone if it does concretize use. sent7: that the bull's-eye is a ileostomy is true. sent8: if the fact that something is obligatory and it does strike rut does not hold then it does not strike rut. sent9: the bull's-eye is a kind of a notation. sent10: something is not an anklebone if it maddens Sphecidae and it is not a kind of a captain. sent11: the fact that if something does not madden Sphecidae it is not an anklebone and not clitoral is not wrong. sent12: if the bull's-eye is not a kind of a ileostomy it is not clitoral. sent13: if the bull's-eye is not a haggler that it is obligatory and it strikes rut is incorrect. sent14: the ex-mayor is not a ileostomy. sent15: something maddens Sphecidae and is not a captain if the fact that it does not strike rut is true. sent16: if the fact that the ex-mayor is an autobiography and it does concretize tisane is not true it does not concretize tisane. sent17: the ex-mayor does not glamorize electric if that it is not a kind of an anklebone and it is a ileostomy is not true. sent18: that if the fact that something is not an anklebone is not wrong then the fact that it is non-clitoral thing that concretizes use is wrong is not false. sent19: the bull's-eye is not clitoral if the fact that it does not glamorize electric and it is a ileostomy is wrong. sent20: that something is a captain but it does not strike rut is not true if it is obligatory. sent21: if the fact that something is a kind of non-clitoral thing that does concretize use is wrong that it is clitoral is correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bull's-eye does not glamorize electric but it is a ileostomy.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the ex-mayor concretizes use.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the ex-mayor is an anklebone.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the bull's-eye does not glamorize electric and is a ileostomy is not true.; int4 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__