there exists something such that it is a Zephaniah and it is a kind of a panopticon.
sent1: the Sno-cat is not non-esophageal or it is not an arresting or both. sent2: if that the wattle does privilege but it does not pole commanding is not true it is a Zephaniah. sent3: the fact that the Sno-cat does not pole commanding is correct. sent4: either the Sno-cat is esophageal or it is an arresting or both. sent5: something is not an arresting. sent6: that if the Sno-cat is not non-esophageal and/or it is not the arresting the Sno-cat is not unquestionable is true. sent7: that the wattle is a privilege and poles commanding is not correct if there is something such that it is not unquestionable. sent8: the wattle is a panopticon. sent9: if the wattle is a kind of a Zephaniah and/or it is not esophageal it is not a privilege. sent10: the wattle is a kind of a Zephaniah if it poles commanding. sent11: that the wattle does privilege and does not pole commanding is not true if there exists something such that it is not unquestionable.
sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the Sno-cat is not unquestionable.; int1 -> int2: something is not unquestionable.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: that that the wattle is a kind of a privilege that does not pole commanding is not wrong does not hold.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the wattle is a Zephaniah.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the wattle is a kind of a Zephaniah that is a panopticon.; int5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is a Zephaniah and it is a kind of a panopticon. ; $context$ = sent1: the Sno-cat is not non-esophageal or it is not an arresting or both. sent2: if that the wattle does privilege but it does not pole commanding is not true it is a Zephaniah. sent3: the fact that the Sno-cat does not pole commanding is correct. sent4: either the Sno-cat is esophageal or it is an arresting or both. sent5: something is not an arresting. sent6: that if the Sno-cat is not non-esophageal and/or it is not the arresting the Sno-cat is not unquestionable is true. sent7: that the wattle is a privilege and poles commanding is not correct if there is something such that it is not unquestionable. sent8: the wattle is a panopticon. sent9: if the wattle is a kind of a Zephaniah and/or it is not esophageal it is not a privilege. sent10: the wattle is a kind of a Zephaniah if it poles commanding. sent11: that the wattle does privilege and does not pole commanding is not true if there exists something such that it is not unquestionable. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the Sno-cat is not unquestionable.; int1 -> int2: something is not unquestionable.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: that that the wattle is a kind of a privilege that does not pole commanding is not wrong does not hold.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the wattle is a Zephaniah.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the wattle is a kind of a Zephaniah that is a panopticon.; int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__