the loon does Simonize mural.
sent1: the loon is a kind of a frank if the vinaigrette is not a minstrel. sent2: the mirasol is a frank if it is a fallibility. sent3: the fact that something does not lunch vinaigrette and is not a kind of a fallibility is false if it is decisive. sent4: that something is apteral thing that does not Simonize mural is not correct if it is a fallibility. sent5: the egocentric is decisive and frivols. sent6: the loon does Simonize mural and it franks if the vinaigrette does not minstrel. sent7: the mirasol is apteral if the egocentric is apteral. sent8: the vinaigrette is apteral if the mirasol does Simonize FAO. sent9: if the mirasol is a taskmistress and is not a frank the acetylene is a taskmistress. sent10: if the fact that that the loon is both not inadmissible and an italic is false is right it is not a fallibility. sent11: the Dunker is not decisive. sent12: the mirasol is not apteral if there is something such that it does not Simonize FAO and recovers. sent13: if the fact that something does not Simonize FAO and recovers is not true it is not a kind of a minstrel. sent14: the loon is a fallibility if the fact that the egocentric does not lunch vinaigrette and it is not a fallibility is incorrect. sent15: the mirasol is apteral if the egocentric is a kind of a fallibility. sent16: if something that is not apteral is a fallibility the egocentric is not a kind of a frank. sent17: something is not apteral if the fact that it is apteral and does not Simonize mural is incorrect. sent18: something is not a minstrel if it does Simonize FAO. sent19: if something is not decisive the egocentric either lunches vinaigrette or is a fallibility or both. sent20: the mirasol does not frank if something is not a minstrel but it is apteral. sent21: the egocentric is apteral and/or it is a kind of a fallibility. sent22: if something is not apteral the mirasol is a kind of a taskmistress and is not a frank. sent23: that the mirasol Simonizes mural and it is apteral is not right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the vinaigrette does not Simonize FAO and recovers.; assump1 -> int1: something does not Simonize FAO and does recover.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the mirasol is not apteral.; sent21 & sent7 & sent15 -> int3: the mirasol is apteral.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the vinaigrette does not Simonize FAO but it recovers is not correct.; sent13 -> int6: if that the vinaigrette does not Simonize FAO but it does recover is incorrect then it is not a minstrel.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the vinaigrette is not a minstrel.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the loon Simonizes mural and franks.; int8 -> hypothesis;
the loon does not Simonize mural.
sent11 -> int9: there exists something such that it is not decisive.; int9 & sent19 -> int10: the egocentric does lunch vinaigrette and/or it is a fallibility.;
$hypothesis$ = the loon does Simonize mural. ; $context$ = sent1: the loon is a kind of a frank if the vinaigrette is not a minstrel. sent2: the mirasol is a frank if it is a fallibility. sent3: the fact that something does not lunch vinaigrette and is not a kind of a fallibility is false if it is decisive. sent4: that something is apteral thing that does not Simonize mural is not correct if it is a fallibility. sent5: the egocentric is decisive and frivols. sent6: the loon does Simonize mural and it franks if the vinaigrette does not minstrel. sent7: the mirasol is apteral if the egocentric is apteral. sent8: the vinaigrette is apteral if the mirasol does Simonize FAO. sent9: if the mirasol is a taskmistress and is not a frank the acetylene is a taskmistress. sent10: if the fact that that the loon is both not inadmissible and an italic is false is right it is not a fallibility. sent11: the Dunker is not decisive. sent12: the mirasol is not apteral if there is something such that it does not Simonize FAO and recovers. sent13: if the fact that something does not Simonize FAO and recovers is not true it is not a kind of a minstrel. sent14: the loon is a fallibility if the fact that the egocentric does not lunch vinaigrette and it is not a fallibility is incorrect. sent15: the mirasol is apteral if the egocentric is a kind of a fallibility. sent16: if something that is not apteral is a fallibility the egocentric is not a kind of a frank. sent17: something is not apteral if the fact that it is apteral and does not Simonize mural is incorrect. sent18: something is not a minstrel if it does Simonize FAO. sent19: if something is not decisive the egocentric either lunches vinaigrette or is a fallibility or both. sent20: the mirasol does not frank if something is not a minstrel but it is apteral. sent21: the egocentric is apteral and/or it is a kind of a fallibility. sent22: if something is not apteral the mirasol is a kind of a taskmistress and is not a frank. sent23: that the mirasol Simonizes mural and it is apteral is not right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the vinaigrette does not Simonize FAO and recovers.; assump1 -> int1: something does not Simonize FAO and does recover.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the mirasol is not apteral.; sent21 & sent7 & sent15 -> int3: the mirasol is apteral.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the vinaigrette does not Simonize FAO but it recovers is not correct.; sent13 -> int6: if that the vinaigrette does not Simonize FAO but it does recover is incorrect then it is not a minstrel.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the vinaigrette is not a minstrel.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the loon Simonizes mural and franks.; int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__