the cutworm is psychogenic.
sent1: the cutworm is not unsalable if it is not psychogenic and does recoup. sent2: the toecap does patrol stacte or it answers or both. sent3: that the cutworm is not a kind of an answering is wrong. sent4: if the cutworm is not unsalable then the toecap patrols stacte and/or it does answer. sent5: the toecap is a kind of a nudge. sent6: the stacte is not a kind of a nudge. sent7: the toecap is not a kind of a nudge if it does not patrol stacte. sent8: the toecap does not recoup but it does patrol stacte. sent9: the cutworm is a clothespin. sent10: something recoups and it is a clothespin if that it is not unsalable is correct. sent11: the toecap does not recoup if the tester does recoup and is a clothespin. sent12: if the fact that the toecap does not patrol stacte and/or it is a kind of an answering is true then it does not nudge. sent13: that the cutworm does recoup and is a clothespin hold. sent14: the toecap does not patrol stacte or answers or both if the fact that the cutworm is not unsalable hold. sent15: the hydrocortisone does not recoup.
sent13 -> int1: the cutworm recoups.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the cutworm is not psychogenic is not incorrect.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the cutworm is not psychogenic but it recoups.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the cutworm is not unsalable is true.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the fact that the toecap does not patrol stacte or is a kind of an answering or both is true.; int4 & sent12 -> int5: the toecap does not nudge.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the cutworm is not psychogenic.
sent10 -> int7: if the tester is salable then it recoups and is a clothespin.;
$hypothesis$ = the cutworm is psychogenic. ; $context$ = sent1: the cutworm is not unsalable if it is not psychogenic and does recoup. sent2: the toecap does patrol stacte or it answers or both. sent3: that the cutworm is not a kind of an answering is wrong. sent4: if the cutworm is not unsalable then the toecap patrols stacte and/or it does answer. sent5: the toecap is a kind of a nudge. sent6: the stacte is not a kind of a nudge. sent7: the toecap is not a kind of a nudge if it does not patrol stacte. sent8: the toecap does not recoup but it does patrol stacte. sent9: the cutworm is a clothespin. sent10: something recoups and it is a clothespin if that it is not unsalable is correct. sent11: the toecap does not recoup if the tester does recoup and is a clothespin. sent12: if the fact that the toecap does not patrol stacte and/or it is a kind of an answering is true then it does not nudge. sent13: that the cutworm does recoup and is a clothespin hold. sent14: the toecap does not patrol stacte or answers or both if the fact that the cutworm is not unsalable hold. sent15: the hydrocortisone does not recoup. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 -> int1: the cutworm recoups.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the cutworm is not psychogenic is not incorrect.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the cutworm is not psychogenic but it recoups.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the cutworm is not unsalable is true.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the fact that the toecap does not patrol stacte or is a kind of an answering or both is true.; int4 & sent12 -> int5: the toecap does not nudge.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__