the five-spot is horticultural and does not curvet Elaeocarpus.
sent1: the five-spot is horticultural if the motherwort is a kind of a jocoseness. sent2: the ward is not indestructible. sent3: if something is a kind of a snowflake but it is not a kind of a leg that it does not sight motherwort is true. sent4: there exists something such that it is not a Aztec. sent5: if the five-spot is not a unicorn then that it is not phonemic and it is not a Aztec is not correct. sent6: that the blade is not indestructible and is not a jocoseness is not right if it is not non-atrioventricular. sent7: that the five-spot is not a unicorn is not incorrect. sent8: if the fact that that the cicada is atrioventricular and is not indestructible is true is not right the blade is not a leg. sent9: a jocoseness is a kind of a snowflake that is not a leg. sent10: the amoralist is not polygonal. sent11: that the fact that something is horticultural but it does not curvet Elaeocarpus is not wrong is not right if that it is a row is not incorrect. sent12: if the ward does not row then the bowler is not a snowflake and it does not row. sent13: the blade is a leg if the ward sights motherwort. sent14: the fact that if that that something is a kind of non-phonemic thing that is not a Aztec is not false is not true then it does not curvet Elaeocarpus is not wrong. sent15: if the fact that the blade is not indestructible and it is not a jocoseness is false then the ward is a jocoseness. sent16: the motherwort is a jocoseness if the bowler is both not a snowflake and not a row. sent17: if the amoralist is not polygonal the fact that that the cicada is both atrioventricular and not indestructible is right does not hold. sent18: the five-spot does not sight motherwort if that the ward is a snowflake and/or it is not a kind of a jocoseness is not correct. sent19: if the ward does row it does sight motherwort. sent20: if something is atrioventricular it is not a kind of a unicorn. sent21: if the fact that the five-spot is not a Aztec and it is not phonemic is wrong it does not sight motherwort. sent22: that the cicada is atrioventricular and indestructible is false. sent23: something is not a leg if it does not sight motherwort and it is not a row.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ward does row.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the ward sights motherwort.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the blade is a leg.; sent17 & sent10 -> int3: the fact that the cicada is atrioventricular but it is not indestructible is not right.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the blade is not a leg.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the ward is not a row.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the bowler is not a kind of a snowflake and does not row.; int7 & sent16 -> int8: the motherwort is a jocoseness.; int8 & sent1 -> int9: the five-spot is horticultural.; sent14 -> int10: that the five-spot does not curvet Elaeocarpus is right if that it is both not phonemic and not a Aztec is not correct.; sent5 & sent7 -> int11: that the five-spot is non-phonemic but not a Aztec does not hold.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the five-spot does not curvet Elaeocarpus.; int9 & int12 -> hypothesis;
that the five-spot is not a kind of a leg hold.
sent23 -> int13: that if the five-spot does not sight motherwort and it does not row the five-spot is not a kind of a leg hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the five-spot is horticultural and does not curvet Elaeocarpus. ; $context$ = sent1: the five-spot is horticultural if the motherwort is a kind of a jocoseness. sent2: the ward is not indestructible. sent3: if something is a kind of a snowflake but it is not a kind of a leg that it does not sight motherwort is true. sent4: there exists something such that it is not a Aztec. sent5: if the five-spot is not a unicorn then that it is not phonemic and it is not a Aztec is not correct. sent6: that the blade is not indestructible and is not a jocoseness is not right if it is not non-atrioventricular. sent7: that the five-spot is not a unicorn is not incorrect. sent8: if the fact that that the cicada is atrioventricular and is not indestructible is true is not right the blade is not a leg. sent9: a jocoseness is a kind of a snowflake that is not a leg. sent10: the amoralist is not polygonal. sent11: that the fact that something is horticultural but it does not curvet Elaeocarpus is not wrong is not right if that it is a row is not incorrect. sent12: if the ward does not row then the bowler is not a snowflake and it does not row. sent13: the blade is a leg if the ward sights motherwort. sent14: the fact that if that that something is a kind of non-phonemic thing that is not a Aztec is not false is not true then it does not curvet Elaeocarpus is not wrong. sent15: if the fact that the blade is not indestructible and it is not a jocoseness is false then the ward is a jocoseness. sent16: the motherwort is a jocoseness if the bowler is both not a snowflake and not a row. sent17: if the amoralist is not polygonal the fact that that the cicada is both atrioventricular and not indestructible is right does not hold. sent18: the five-spot does not sight motherwort if that the ward is a snowflake and/or it is not a kind of a jocoseness is not correct. sent19: if the ward does row it does sight motherwort. sent20: if something is atrioventricular it is not a kind of a unicorn. sent21: if the fact that the five-spot is not a Aztec and it is not phonemic is wrong it does not sight motherwort. sent22: that the cicada is atrioventricular and indestructible is false. sent23: something is not a leg if it does not sight motherwort and it is not a row. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ward does row.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the ward sights motherwort.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the blade is a leg.; sent17 & sent10 -> int3: the fact that the cicada is atrioventricular but it is not indestructible is not right.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the blade is not a leg.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the ward is not a row.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the bowler is not a kind of a snowflake and does not row.; int7 & sent16 -> int8: the motherwort is a jocoseness.; int8 & sent1 -> int9: the five-spot is horticultural.; sent14 -> int10: that the five-spot does not curvet Elaeocarpus is right if that it is both not phonemic and not a Aztec is not correct.; sent5 & sent7 -> int11: that the five-spot is non-phonemic but not a Aztec does not hold.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the five-spot does not curvet Elaeocarpus.; int9 & int12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__