the fact that the Hogan is not an undesirable is right.
sent1: the bignoniad does not describe CRT and it does not cremate AUC if the CRT describe CRT. sent2: the CRT does describe CRT if there exists something such that it does not maneuver and is not taxonomic. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a maneuver and it is not taxonomic. sent4: the conk exempts hooch if something does not describe CRT and it does not cremate AUC. sent5: if the conk either is minimalist or does exempt hooch or both the Hogan is not an undesirable.
sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the CRT describes CRT.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the bignoniad does not describe CRT and does not cremate AUC.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that it does not describe CRT and it does not cremate AUC.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the conk exempts hooch.; int4 -> int5: either the conk is a kind of a minimalist or it does exempt hooch or both.; sent5 & int5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Hogan is not an undesirable is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the bignoniad does not describe CRT and it does not cremate AUC if the CRT describe CRT. sent2: the CRT does describe CRT if there exists something such that it does not maneuver and is not taxonomic. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a maneuver and it is not taxonomic. sent4: the conk exempts hooch if something does not describe CRT and it does not cremate AUC. sent5: if the conk either is minimalist or does exempt hooch or both the Hogan is not an undesirable. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the CRT describes CRT.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the bignoniad does not describe CRT and does not cremate AUC.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that it does not describe CRT and it does not cremate AUC.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the conk exempts hooch.; int4 -> int5: either the conk is a kind of a minimalist or it does exempt hooch or both.; sent5 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__