that the Farmer is a ohmage is right.
sent1: the Farmer is a iproclozide. sent2: if something is uncomplimentary then that the fact that it is not a kind of a numberplate or it is not a kind of a stipendiary or both is right is not correct. sent3: the fact that the Farmer does not jellify internationalist and it is not a kind of a gastroenterostomy is not true if it does not exceed oculism. sent4: something is not a ohmage if it does not drape uppercut and is not a gastroenterostomy. sent5: a slouch that is not a kind of a stipendiary does not tailgate. sent6: if that something is a iproclozide is true then it is a slouch. sent7: if something does not preempt Lamnidae but it is an efferent it does not drape uppercut. sent8: the Kusan does exceed Chile and it is a bathymetry if the Farmer is not a tailgate. sent9: the Farmer does not exceed oculism. sent10: if something does not drape uppercut then it is not a kind of a ohmage. sent11: the fact that the animator is uncomplimentary is true if the American is biblical. sent12: something does drape uppercut if that it does not jellify internationalist and it is not a gastroenterostomy is not right. sent13: the fact that the Farmer jellifies internationalist and is not a gastroenterostomy does not hold. sent14: if the Farmer is not a ohmage then it does not preempt Lamnidae and is efferent. sent15: if something does exceed Chile that that it does not exceed oculism and is a gastroenterostomy is true is not correct. sent16: if something that does preempt Lamnidae is an efferent then it does not drape uppercut. sent17: The oculism does not exceed Farmer. sent18: if the fact that something does not exceed oculism and is a kind of a gastroenterostomy is false then it does not drape uppercut. sent19: the Farmer is not a kind of a stipendiary if that the animator is not a numberplate or it is not stipendiary or both is not correct. sent20: the American is both a grassfire and biblical. sent21: the Farmer does not preempt Lamnidae.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Farmer is not a ohmage.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the Farmer does not preempt Lamnidae but it is a kind of an efferent.; sent7 -> int2: the Farmer does not drape uppercut if it does not preempt Lamnidae and is efferent.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Farmer does not drape uppercut.; sent12 -> int4: the Farmer drapes uppercut if the fact that it does not jellify internationalist and is not a gastroenterostomy does not hold.; sent3 & sent9 -> int5: that the Farmer does not jellify internationalist and is not a gastroenterostomy is wrong.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the Farmer does drape uppercut.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the Farmer is not a kind of a ohmage.
sent4 -> int8: if the Farmer does not drape uppercut and it is not a kind of a gastroenterostomy then that it is not a ohmage is not wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = that the Farmer is a ohmage is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the Farmer is a iproclozide. sent2: if something is uncomplimentary then that the fact that it is not a kind of a numberplate or it is not a kind of a stipendiary or both is right is not correct. sent3: the fact that the Farmer does not jellify internationalist and it is not a kind of a gastroenterostomy is not true if it does not exceed oculism. sent4: something is not a ohmage if it does not drape uppercut and is not a gastroenterostomy. sent5: a slouch that is not a kind of a stipendiary does not tailgate. sent6: if that something is a iproclozide is true then it is a slouch. sent7: if something does not preempt Lamnidae but it is an efferent it does not drape uppercut. sent8: the Kusan does exceed Chile and it is a bathymetry if the Farmer is not a tailgate. sent9: the Farmer does not exceed oculism. sent10: if something does not drape uppercut then it is not a kind of a ohmage. sent11: the fact that the animator is uncomplimentary is true if the American is biblical. sent12: something does drape uppercut if that it does not jellify internationalist and it is not a gastroenterostomy is not right. sent13: the fact that the Farmer jellifies internationalist and is not a gastroenterostomy does not hold. sent14: if the Farmer is not a ohmage then it does not preempt Lamnidae and is efferent. sent15: if something does exceed Chile that that it does not exceed oculism and is a gastroenterostomy is true is not correct. sent16: if something that does preempt Lamnidae is an efferent then it does not drape uppercut. sent17: The oculism does not exceed Farmer. sent18: if the fact that something does not exceed oculism and is a kind of a gastroenterostomy is false then it does not drape uppercut. sent19: the Farmer is not a kind of a stipendiary if that the animator is not a numberplate or it is not stipendiary or both is not correct. sent20: the American is both a grassfire and biblical. sent21: the Farmer does not preempt Lamnidae. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Farmer is not a ohmage.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the Farmer does not preempt Lamnidae but it is a kind of an efferent.; sent7 -> int2: the Farmer does not drape uppercut if it does not preempt Lamnidae and is efferent.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Farmer does not drape uppercut.; sent12 -> int4: the Farmer drapes uppercut if the fact that it does not jellify internationalist and is not a gastroenterostomy does not hold.; sent3 & sent9 -> int5: that the Farmer does not jellify internationalist and is not a gastroenterostomy is wrong.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the Farmer does drape uppercut.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__