the fact that the down is a greensand is not incorrect.
sent1: if the ivy is a venerator then the Dictaphone is a venerator. sent2: something is a kind of a greensand if it is not a venerator. sent3: something is unpleasant if it is participial. sent4: the crammer is not prewar if that the down is a kind of prewar thing that is not unpleasant is false. sent5: something is a Areopagus if it is a kind of a venerator. sent6: that the humpback is photovoltaic and is not bituminoid hold. sent7: that the crammer offers Gombrowicz is correct. sent8: that the Dictaphone is a kind of unargumentative thing that is a kind of a Areopagus does not hold if the fact that the down is a venerator is right. sent9: if the Dictaphone is a kind of a venerator then that the down is not non-prewar and not unpleasant does not hold. sent10: the ivy is a kind of a venerator if something is either not a greensand or not participial or both. sent11: if there is something such that that it does not alibi crammer hold then the crammer does overcharge or it is participial or both. sent12: if something overcharges then it is not pleasant. sent13: if the humpback is not bituminoid then it is cinematic and it does offer Gombrowicz. sent14: the down is not a kind of a greensand if the Dictaphone is not a kind of a venerator but it is unpleasant. sent15: something does not alibi crammer. sent16: if something does not alibi crammer then it is participial and it overcharges. sent17: something either is not a greensand or is not participial or both if it is an overcharge. sent18: that the crammer is not unpleasant hold if the fact that the Dictaphone is a kind of unargumentative thing that is a Areopagus is wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the down is a venerator.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the Dictaphone is a kind of non-argumentative thing that is a Areopagus is not true.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the crammer is not unpleasant.; sent15 & sent11 -> int3: the crammer is an overcharge or participial or both.; sent12 -> int4: if the crammer overcharges then it is unpleasant.; sent3 -> int5: the crammer is unpleasant if it is participial.; int3 & int4 & int5 -> int6: the crammer is unpleasant.; int2 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: that the down is not a venerator hold.; sent2 -> int9: that if the down is not the venerator then the down is a greensand hold.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis;
the down is not a kind of a greensand.
sent16 -> int10: if the Dictaphone does not alibi crammer then it is both participial and an overcharge.; sent7 -> int11: something does offer Gombrowicz.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the down is a greensand is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the ivy is a venerator then the Dictaphone is a venerator. sent2: something is a kind of a greensand if it is not a venerator. sent3: something is unpleasant if it is participial. sent4: the crammer is not prewar if that the down is a kind of prewar thing that is not unpleasant is false. sent5: something is a Areopagus if it is a kind of a venerator. sent6: that the humpback is photovoltaic and is not bituminoid hold. sent7: that the crammer offers Gombrowicz is correct. sent8: that the Dictaphone is a kind of unargumentative thing that is a kind of a Areopagus does not hold if the fact that the down is a venerator is right. sent9: if the Dictaphone is a kind of a venerator then that the down is not non-prewar and not unpleasant does not hold. sent10: the ivy is a kind of a venerator if something is either not a greensand or not participial or both. sent11: if there is something such that that it does not alibi crammer hold then the crammer does overcharge or it is participial or both. sent12: if something overcharges then it is not pleasant. sent13: if the humpback is not bituminoid then it is cinematic and it does offer Gombrowicz. sent14: the down is not a kind of a greensand if the Dictaphone is not a kind of a venerator but it is unpleasant. sent15: something does not alibi crammer. sent16: if something does not alibi crammer then it is participial and it overcharges. sent17: something either is not a greensand or is not participial or both if it is an overcharge. sent18: that the crammer is not unpleasant hold if the fact that the Dictaphone is a kind of unargumentative thing that is a Areopagus is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the down is a venerator.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the Dictaphone is a kind of non-argumentative thing that is a Areopagus is not true.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the crammer is not unpleasant.; sent15 & sent11 -> int3: the crammer is an overcharge or participial or both.; sent12 -> int4: if the crammer overcharges then it is unpleasant.; sent3 -> int5: the crammer is unpleasant if it is participial.; int3 & int4 & int5 -> int6: the crammer is unpleasant.; int2 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: that the down is not a venerator hold.; sent2 -> int9: that if the down is not the venerator then the down is a greensand hold.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__