the monastery does not risk exteroception.
sent1: there is something such that that either it is autoecious or it does command subsumption or both is not true. sent2: the sugar does not risk PWR. sent3: the PWR is not Solomonic. sent4: the Winnebago does stable Hexagrammidae. sent5: the capital commands chieftaincy and it is a kind of a pinochle. sent6: if the PWR risks segregator the sugar does not stable Hexagrammidae. sent7: that the monastery does not risk exteroception is not false if the fact that the sugar risks segregator and/or it is autoecious is true. sent8: if the PWR is not Solomonic it does risk allegory and does command subsumption. sent9: the sugar risks segregator if something does stable Hexagrammidae and does risk allegory. sent10: the PWR is autoecious and/or it stables Hexagrammidae. sent11: if the PWR does not stable Hexagrammidae or it does pencil or both then the fact that it is not a pinochle hold. sent12: if something does not risk segregator then the fact that it is a pinochle and it risks allegory does not hold. sent13: the PWR is a pinochle. sent14: the sugar risks allegory or it does risk segregator or both. sent15: something risks exteroception and it does stable Hexagrammidae if it is not a pencil.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the PWR does not stable Hexagrammidae.; assump1 -> int1: the PWR does not stable Hexagrammidae or pencils or both.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the PWR is not a pinochle.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the PWR does stable Hexagrammidae.; sent8 & sent3 -> int5: the PWR does risk allegory and commands subsumption.; int5 -> int6: the PWR does risk allegory.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the PWR does stable Hexagrammidae and does risk allegory.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that it does stable Hexagrammidae and it risks allegory.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the sugar risks segregator.; int9 -> int10: either the sugar risks segregator or it is autoecious or both.; int10 & sent7 -> hypothesis;
the monastery risks exteroception.
sent15 -> int11: the monastery risks exteroception and stables Hexagrammidae if it is not a pencil.; sent12 -> int12: the fact that the monastery is a pinochle and it risks allegory is not correct if it does not risk segregator.;
$hypothesis$ = the monastery does not risk exteroception. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that either it is autoecious or it does command subsumption or both is not true. sent2: the sugar does not risk PWR. sent3: the PWR is not Solomonic. sent4: the Winnebago does stable Hexagrammidae. sent5: the capital commands chieftaincy and it is a kind of a pinochle. sent6: if the PWR risks segregator the sugar does not stable Hexagrammidae. sent7: that the monastery does not risk exteroception is not false if the fact that the sugar risks segregator and/or it is autoecious is true. sent8: if the PWR is not Solomonic it does risk allegory and does command subsumption. sent9: the sugar risks segregator if something does stable Hexagrammidae and does risk allegory. sent10: the PWR is autoecious and/or it stables Hexagrammidae. sent11: if the PWR does not stable Hexagrammidae or it does pencil or both then the fact that it is not a pinochle hold. sent12: if something does not risk segregator then the fact that it is a pinochle and it risks allegory does not hold. sent13: the PWR is a pinochle. sent14: the sugar risks allegory or it does risk segregator or both. sent15: something risks exteroception and it does stable Hexagrammidae if it is not a pencil. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the PWR does not stable Hexagrammidae.; assump1 -> int1: the PWR does not stable Hexagrammidae or pencils or both.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the PWR is not a pinochle.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the PWR does stable Hexagrammidae.; sent8 & sent3 -> int5: the PWR does risk allegory and commands subsumption.; int5 -> int6: the PWR does risk allegory.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the PWR does stable Hexagrammidae and does risk allegory.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that it does stable Hexagrammidae and it risks allegory.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the sugar risks segregator.; int9 -> int10: either the sugar risks segregator or it is autoecious or both.; int10 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__