if the cupola is a pistillode that the lumen does not multiply maglev and is a reversed is wrong.
sent1: the Danish is not a kind of a consultation if the fact that it does poultice lumen and it is a consultation does not hold. sent2: the cupola is not a friendly. sent3: that something is not a kind of a pistillode and is not autotypic is false if it is reversed. sent4: if the lumen is not autotypic then the fact that it does not multiply maglev and is a reversed is true. sent5: if the cupola is a pistillode then it is polemoniaceous and it is not a friendly. sent6: the lumen does not multiply maglev and is reversed. sent7: if the cupola is a kind of a pistillode then that it is not a friendly is right. sent8: the Roquefort does not multiply maglev. sent9: the fact that the lumen is not autotypic is not incorrect if the cupola is polemoniaceous thing that is not a friendly. sent10: the sunset is polemoniaceous thing that does not lament. sent11: if that the lumen is not autotypic is not wrong that it multiplies maglev and it is not non-reversed is false. sent12: the fact that something multiplies maglev and is a reversed is not true if it is not autotypic. sent13: if something is not autotypic the fact that it does not multiply maglev and it is a kind of a reversed does not hold. sent14: something is a kind of a reversed and it multiplies maglev if it is not a consultation. sent15: if the cupola is a kind of a pistillode the fact that the lumen multiplies maglev and is reversed is incorrect. sent16: something is not a friendly if that it is not a pistillode and it is not autotypic is not correct. sent17: if the cupola is polemoniaceous thing that is not unfriendly the lumen is not autotypic. sent18: the lumen does not multiply maglev and is reversed if the cupola is a pistillode. sent19: the fact that the lumen multiplies maglev and is reversed is wrong. sent20: something does not multiply maglev but it is a kind of a reversed if it is not autotypic.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cupola is a kind of a pistillode.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the cupola is both polemoniaceous and not friendly.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the fact that the lumen is not autotypic hold.; sent13 -> int3: if the fact that the lumen is not autotypic is not incorrect that it does not multiply maglev and it is reversed is false.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the lumen does not multiply maglev and is a reversed is incorrect.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the Danish is not friendly.
sent16 -> int5: if the fact that the Danish is not a pistillode and it is not autotypic is not true it is unfriendly.; sent3 -> int6: if the Danish is reversed then the fact that it is not a pistillode and it is not autotypic does not hold.; sent14 -> int7: if the Danish is not a consultation then it is a kind of a reversed and does multiply maglev.;
$hypothesis$ = if the cupola is a pistillode that the lumen does not multiply maglev and is a reversed is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the Danish is not a kind of a consultation if the fact that it does poultice lumen and it is a consultation does not hold. sent2: the cupola is not a friendly. sent3: that something is not a kind of a pistillode and is not autotypic is false if it is reversed. sent4: if the lumen is not autotypic then the fact that it does not multiply maglev and is a reversed is true. sent5: if the cupola is a pistillode then it is polemoniaceous and it is not a friendly. sent6: the lumen does not multiply maglev and is reversed. sent7: if the cupola is a kind of a pistillode then that it is not a friendly is right. sent8: the Roquefort does not multiply maglev. sent9: the fact that the lumen is not autotypic is not incorrect if the cupola is polemoniaceous thing that is not a friendly. sent10: the sunset is polemoniaceous thing that does not lament. sent11: if that the lumen is not autotypic is not wrong that it multiplies maglev and it is not non-reversed is false. sent12: the fact that something multiplies maglev and is a reversed is not true if it is not autotypic. sent13: if something is not autotypic the fact that it does not multiply maglev and it is a kind of a reversed does not hold. sent14: something is a kind of a reversed and it multiplies maglev if it is not a consultation. sent15: if the cupola is a kind of a pistillode the fact that the lumen multiplies maglev and is reversed is incorrect. sent16: something is not a friendly if that it is not a pistillode and it is not autotypic is not correct. sent17: if the cupola is polemoniaceous thing that is not unfriendly the lumen is not autotypic. sent18: the lumen does not multiply maglev and is reversed if the cupola is a pistillode. sent19: the fact that the lumen multiplies maglev and is reversed is wrong. sent20: something does not multiply maglev but it is a kind of a reversed if it is not autotypic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cupola is a kind of a pistillode.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the cupola is both polemoniaceous and not friendly.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the fact that the lumen is not autotypic hold.; sent13 -> int3: if the fact that the lumen is not autotypic is not incorrect that it does not multiply maglev and it is reversed is false.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the lumen does not multiply maglev and is a reversed is incorrect.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__