there exists something such that if it does impinge dirtiness then it is not a goby and it is invariable.
sent1: if something is a schizocarp and is a kind of a lapidary it does not impinge dirtiness. sent2: there exists something such that if it blacklists applet it does not impinge phytochemist and is a kind of a Iraqi. sent3: that the corticosterone does impinge dirtiness hold if it is a schizocarp and is a lapidary. sent4: if the corticosterone is not invariable then it is not a kind of a goby and it does not stave feeling. sent5: something impinges dirtiness if it is a schizocarp. sent6: there is something such that if it impinges dirtiness then it is invariable. sent7: if the corticosterone is not a goby and does not stave feeling then the smegma is not a goby. sent8: if something is not a lapidary then it is not a kind of a goby and is invariable. sent9: if the corticosterone is not lapidary it is not a goby. sent10: if the fact that the corticosterone impinges dirtiness is correct it is not a goby. sent11: if the fact that the craps is not a Uniat is correct then it is not variable. sent12: there is something such that if it impinges dirtiness then it is a kind of a goby and is invariable. sent13: if something is a schizocarp and is a lapidary it does impinge dirtiness. sent14: the corticosterone is not an adopter but it is a kind of a schizocarp if it is not a PR. sent15: the corticosterone is not invariable if the craps is invariable and it is proprietary. sent16: that the corticosterone is a schizocarp is right. sent17: there is something such that if it impinges dirtiness then it is not a goby. sent18: the corticosterone is not a goby.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the corticosterone is not non-lapidary is not wrong.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the corticosterone is a schizocarp and it is lapidary is not false.; sent1 -> int2: if the corticosterone is a kind of a schizocarp and it is a kind of a lapidary the fact that it does not impinge dirtiness is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the corticosterone does not impinge dirtiness.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the corticosterone impinges dirtiness.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the corticosterone is not a lapidary.; sent8 -> int6: if the corticosterone is non-lapidary it is not a goby but invariable.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the corticosterone is not a goby but it is invariable.; [assump2] & int7 -> int8: if the corticosterone does impinge dirtiness then it is not a kind of a goby and it is invariable.; int8 -> hypothesis;
the smegma does impinge dirtiness.
sent5 -> int9: if the smegma is a kind of a schizocarp it impinges dirtiness.;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does impinge dirtiness then it is not a goby and it is invariable. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a schizocarp and is a kind of a lapidary it does not impinge dirtiness. sent2: there exists something such that if it blacklists applet it does not impinge phytochemist and is a kind of a Iraqi. sent3: that the corticosterone does impinge dirtiness hold if it is a schizocarp and is a lapidary. sent4: if the corticosterone is not invariable then it is not a kind of a goby and it does not stave feeling. sent5: something impinges dirtiness if it is a schizocarp. sent6: there is something such that if it impinges dirtiness then it is invariable. sent7: if the corticosterone is not a goby and does not stave feeling then the smegma is not a goby. sent8: if something is not a lapidary then it is not a kind of a goby and is invariable. sent9: if the corticosterone is not lapidary it is not a goby. sent10: if the fact that the corticosterone impinges dirtiness is correct it is not a goby. sent11: if the fact that the craps is not a Uniat is correct then it is not variable. sent12: there is something such that if it impinges dirtiness then it is a kind of a goby and is invariable. sent13: if something is a schizocarp and is a lapidary it does impinge dirtiness. sent14: the corticosterone is not an adopter but it is a kind of a schizocarp if it is not a PR. sent15: the corticosterone is not invariable if the craps is invariable and it is proprietary. sent16: that the corticosterone is a schizocarp is right. sent17: there is something such that if it impinges dirtiness then it is not a goby. sent18: the corticosterone is not a goby. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the corticosterone is not non-lapidary is not wrong.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the corticosterone is a schizocarp and it is lapidary is not false.; sent1 -> int2: if the corticosterone is a kind of a schizocarp and it is a kind of a lapidary the fact that it does not impinge dirtiness is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the corticosterone does not impinge dirtiness.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the corticosterone impinges dirtiness.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the corticosterone is not a lapidary.; sent8 -> int6: if the corticosterone is non-lapidary it is not a goby but invariable.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the corticosterone is not a goby but it is invariable.; [assump2] & int7 -> int8: if the corticosterone does impinge dirtiness then it is not a kind of a goby and it is invariable.; int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__