either the waltzer is a Micromyx or it is a kind of a bowleg or both.
sent1: something is uvular and/or not a Mallon. sent2: the spirochete does not instrument acronym. sent3: the spirochete is not uvular if the fact that it is a three-decker and/or not an aspen is not true. sent4: if the newel mystifies GRAPO it does not mystify Deuteronomy. sent5: the waltzer does mystify GRAPO and does mystify Deuteronomy if that the newel is not behavioral is correct. sent6: if something mystifies GRAPO then it does not mystify Deuteronomy. sent7: the newel is not a counterexample if something is uvular and/or it is not a Mallon. sent8: if that the newel is not a counterexample is not incorrect it mystifies Deuteronomy. sent9: the waltzer is a Micromyx if the maypop is not non-behavioral. sent10: something is not a kind of a counterexample if it does mystify Deuteronomy and/or mystifies GRAPO. sent11: the newel is a kind of a tarsal if it is irresponsible. sent12: the maypop does mystify mute. sent13: if the spirochete does not instrument acronym then that it is a kind of a three-decker and/or it is not an aspen is not correct. sent14: if something is tarsal and/or it does mystify GRAPO it does not mystify Deuteronomy. sent15: the fact that the maypop is irresponsible and it is behavioral is wrong. sent16: if the newel does integrate Selznick it is not a kind of a pro. sent17: the waltzer is frontal and/or it is irresponsible. sent18: something that does mystify GRAPO is a kind of a tarsal. sent19: if the newel is not irresponsible the fact that the maypop is a kind of irresponsible thing that is behavioral is incorrect. sent20: if there exists something such that it is not a Mallon the fact that the newel is not a kind of a counterexample hold. sent21: the fact that that something is a Micromyx and/or it does bow is right is not true if it is not irresponsible. sent22: that the waltzer is a kind of a Micromyx is not wrong if that the maypop is both irresponsible and not behavioral is not right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the newel is irresponsible.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the newel is a kind of a tarsal.; int1 -> int2: the newel is a tarsal and/or it mystifies GRAPO.; sent14 -> int3: the newel does not mystify Deuteronomy if it is a tarsal and/or it mystifies GRAPO.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the newel does not mystify Deuteronomy.; sent1 & sent7 -> int5: the newel is not a counterexample.; sent8 & int5 -> int6: the newel mystifies Deuteronomy.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the fact that the newel is not irresponsible is correct.;
that either the waltzer is a Micromyx or it is a bowleg or both is not right.
sent21 -> int9: the fact that the waltzer is a kind of a Micromyx or it is a bowleg or both is incorrect if it is non-irresponsible.; sent18 -> int10: that the waltzer is tarsal if the waltzer does mystify GRAPO hold.; sent13 & sent2 -> int11: the fact that the spirochete is a three-decker or it is not a kind of an aspen or both is false.; sent3 & int11 -> int12: the spirochete is not uvular.;
$hypothesis$ = either the waltzer is a Micromyx or it is a kind of a bowleg or both. ; $context$ = sent1: something is uvular and/or not a Mallon. sent2: the spirochete does not instrument acronym. sent3: the spirochete is not uvular if the fact that it is a three-decker and/or not an aspen is not true. sent4: if the newel mystifies GRAPO it does not mystify Deuteronomy. sent5: the waltzer does mystify GRAPO and does mystify Deuteronomy if that the newel is not behavioral is correct. sent6: if something mystifies GRAPO then it does not mystify Deuteronomy. sent7: the newel is not a counterexample if something is uvular and/or it is not a Mallon. sent8: if that the newel is not a counterexample is not incorrect it mystifies Deuteronomy. sent9: the waltzer is a Micromyx if the maypop is not non-behavioral. sent10: something is not a kind of a counterexample if it does mystify Deuteronomy and/or mystifies GRAPO. sent11: the newel is a kind of a tarsal if it is irresponsible. sent12: the maypop does mystify mute. sent13: if the spirochete does not instrument acronym then that it is a kind of a three-decker and/or it is not an aspen is not correct. sent14: if something is tarsal and/or it does mystify GRAPO it does not mystify Deuteronomy. sent15: the fact that the maypop is irresponsible and it is behavioral is wrong. sent16: if the newel does integrate Selznick it is not a kind of a pro. sent17: the waltzer is frontal and/or it is irresponsible. sent18: something that does mystify GRAPO is a kind of a tarsal. sent19: if the newel is not irresponsible the fact that the maypop is a kind of irresponsible thing that is behavioral is incorrect. sent20: if there exists something such that it is not a Mallon the fact that the newel is not a kind of a counterexample hold. sent21: the fact that that something is a Micromyx and/or it does bow is right is not true if it is not irresponsible. sent22: that the waltzer is a kind of a Micromyx is not wrong if that the maypop is both irresponsible and not behavioral is not right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the newel is irresponsible.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the newel is a kind of a tarsal.; int1 -> int2: the newel is a tarsal and/or it mystifies GRAPO.; sent14 -> int3: the newel does not mystify Deuteronomy if it is a tarsal and/or it mystifies GRAPO.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the newel does not mystify Deuteronomy.; sent1 & sent7 -> int5: the newel is not a counterexample.; sent8 & int5 -> int6: the newel mystifies Deuteronomy.; int4 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the fact that the newel is not irresponsible is correct.; __UNKNOWN__