the interpreter is oleophobic and it is a Updike.
sent1: the yew is disproportionate if the fact that that either the chachka is a kind of a Azolla or it is not mitral or both does not hold hold. sent2: something is oleophobic if it is not unthematic. sent3: if that the Mennonite is a kind of a cartouche is not wrong the BA prevents. sent4: the Mennonite is disproportionate. sent5: if the chachka is not mitral then it does scuffle. sent6: if the wearer is not disproportionate the fact that it is oleophobic and unthematic does not hold. sent7: if that the yew is both disproportionate and not nontraditional is not correct then it is not disproportionate. sent8: the BA is nontraditional and it is unthematic if it is not disproportionate. sent9: the Mennonite is a kind of a cartouche if the yew is disproportionate. sent10: the interpreter is a Azolla. sent11: the chachka is not a Azolla. sent12: the fact that the yew is disproportionate and is unthematic if the yew does not prevent is not false. sent13: if the fact that the BA does prevent and is not nontraditional is not true then it does not prevent. sent14: that the BA does prevent and is not nontraditional is not correct if something is a jerk. sent15: the BA is a Updike. sent16: the BA frazzles if the fact that the fact that the interpreter prevents or it is not oleophobic or both is true does not hold. sent17: the interpreter does not frazzle if the wearer is not unthematic. sent18: the chachka does not hog interpreter. sent19: if the wearer is not thematic that the chachka is a Azolla or it is not mitral or both is false. sent20: the Mennonite is not oleophobic. sent21: something is both oleophobic and a Updike if it is not a frazzle. sent22: if something is not nontraditional it prevents. sent23: there is something such that it is a jerk.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wearer is unthematic.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the chachka is a Azolla or it is not mitral or both is not correct.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the yew is disproportionate.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the fact that the Mennonite is a cartouche is not wrong.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the BA does prevent.; sent23 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that the BA does prevent and is not nontraditional is not true.; sent13 & int5 -> int6: the BA does not prevent.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the wearer is not unthematic.; int8 & sent17 -> int9: the interpreter is not a frazzle.; sent21 -> int10: if the interpreter is not a frazzle then it is oleophobic and it is a Updike.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
that the interpreter is not non-oleophobic and it is a Updike is incorrect.
$hypothesis$ = the interpreter is oleophobic and it is a Updike. ; $context$ = sent1: the yew is disproportionate if the fact that that either the chachka is a kind of a Azolla or it is not mitral or both does not hold hold. sent2: something is oleophobic if it is not unthematic. sent3: if that the Mennonite is a kind of a cartouche is not wrong the BA prevents. sent4: the Mennonite is disproportionate. sent5: if the chachka is not mitral then it does scuffle. sent6: if the wearer is not disproportionate the fact that it is oleophobic and unthematic does not hold. sent7: if that the yew is both disproportionate and not nontraditional is not correct then it is not disproportionate. sent8: the BA is nontraditional and it is unthematic if it is not disproportionate. sent9: the Mennonite is a kind of a cartouche if the yew is disproportionate. sent10: the interpreter is a Azolla. sent11: the chachka is not a Azolla. sent12: the fact that the yew is disproportionate and is unthematic if the yew does not prevent is not false. sent13: if the fact that the BA does prevent and is not nontraditional is not true then it does not prevent. sent14: that the BA does prevent and is not nontraditional is not correct if something is a jerk. sent15: the BA is a Updike. sent16: the BA frazzles if the fact that the fact that the interpreter prevents or it is not oleophobic or both is true does not hold. sent17: the interpreter does not frazzle if the wearer is not unthematic. sent18: the chachka does not hog interpreter. sent19: if the wearer is not thematic that the chachka is a Azolla or it is not mitral or both is false. sent20: the Mennonite is not oleophobic. sent21: something is both oleophobic and a Updike if it is not a frazzle. sent22: if something is not nontraditional it prevents. sent23: there is something such that it is a jerk. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wearer is unthematic.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the chachka is a Azolla or it is not mitral or both is not correct.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the yew is disproportionate.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the fact that the Mennonite is a cartouche is not wrong.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the BA does prevent.; sent23 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that the BA does prevent and is not nontraditional is not true.; sent13 & int5 -> int6: the BA does not prevent.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the wearer is not unthematic.; int8 & sent17 -> int9: the interpreter is not a frazzle.; sent21 -> int10: if the interpreter is not a frazzle then it is oleophobic and it is a Updike.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__