if the puffin does not enliven then the waker is a pennycress and it is a proficiency.
sent1: the fact that the waker is a kind of a caisson is right. sent2: the waker is a proficiency. sent3: if the fact that the puffin is not a houseroom and not unconscientious is incorrect then the chemical is a caisson. sent4: something that either is not nephritic or is not a proficiency or both is not a proficiency. sent5: the chemical is not nephritic and/or is not a proficiency. sent6: the puffin is a houseroom if the chemical does enliven. sent7: if the puffin enlivens that it is not a houseroom and it is not unconscientious does not hold. sent8: if something does not enliven it is starchless and it does pulsate. sent9: something does not enliven if it is a caisson. sent10: the waker is a pennycress if the chemical is a kind of a caisson. sent11: the fact that the fact that the puffin is not the houseroom and is unconscientious is wrong if the puffin does not enliven is correct. sent12: if something does not enliven the fact that the fact that it is not a houseroom and not unconscientious is not false does not hold. sent13: if something does not enliven that it is a houseroom and it is not unconscientious is not right.
sent12 -> int1: if the puffin does not enliven that it is not a kind of a houseroom and is not unconscientious is incorrect.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the puffin enlivens is wrong.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the puffin is not a houseroom and it is conscientious is false.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the chemical is a kind of a caisson.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the waker is a pennycress.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the waker is a kind of a pennycress and it is a proficiency.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the simoom is starchless thing that does pulsate.
sent8 -> int6: if the simoom does not enliven it is starchless and does pulsate.; sent9 -> int7: the simoom does not enliven if it is a caisson.; sent4 -> int8: the chemical is not a proficiency if it is not nephritic or is not a proficiency or both.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the chemical is not a kind of a proficiency.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it is not a proficiency.;
$hypothesis$ = if the puffin does not enliven then the waker is a pennycress and it is a proficiency. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the waker is a kind of a caisson is right. sent2: the waker is a proficiency. sent3: if the fact that the puffin is not a houseroom and not unconscientious is incorrect then the chemical is a caisson. sent4: something that either is not nephritic or is not a proficiency or both is not a proficiency. sent5: the chemical is not nephritic and/or is not a proficiency. sent6: the puffin is a houseroom if the chemical does enliven. sent7: if the puffin enlivens that it is not a houseroom and it is not unconscientious does not hold. sent8: if something does not enliven it is starchless and it does pulsate. sent9: something does not enliven if it is a caisson. sent10: the waker is a pennycress if the chemical is a kind of a caisson. sent11: the fact that the fact that the puffin is not the houseroom and is unconscientious is wrong if the puffin does not enliven is correct. sent12: if something does not enliven the fact that the fact that it is not a houseroom and not unconscientious is not false does not hold. sent13: if something does not enliven that it is a houseroom and it is not unconscientious is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: if the puffin does not enliven that it is not a kind of a houseroom and is not unconscientious is incorrect.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the puffin enlivens is wrong.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: that the puffin is not a houseroom and it is conscientious is false.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the chemical is a kind of a caisson.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the waker is a pennycress.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the waker is a kind of a pennycress and it is a proficiency.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__