that the Cheyenne is a kind of a iron-tree but it is not a kind of a propanal does not hold.
sent1: that the skivvy does incriminate Ozawa but it is not a deossification does not hold if it chances replication. sent2: if the serape is not a kind of a deossification then that the spacesuit is not paranormal and is criminological is incorrect. sent3: if something is an ashtray that it is a kind of a iron-tree and it is not a kind of a propanal is not true. sent4: if the skivvy does chance replication then the Cheyenne is a kind of an ashtray. sent5: if something does not incriminate Ozawa then that it is paranormal and/or is criminological is incorrect. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it is not dependent and it is consonantal is not correct then the apparatchik incriminates Ozawa. sent7: the spacesuit is non-paranormal and not non-criminological if the alizarin is not dependent. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is dependent and is consonantal is not right. sent9: the spacesuit is not independent if the apparatchik is both paranormal and not independent. sent10: if something is consonantal then it is not dependent. sent11: if the apparatchik does incriminate Ozawa the skivvy does chance replication. sent12: if the alizarin is not consonantal the fact that the spacesuit is both not criminological and a propanal does not hold. sent13: the Cheyenne is consonantal if there is something such that that it either is paranormal or is criminological or both is not right. sent14: the serape is not a deossification.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the alizarin is both not dependent and consonantal.; assump1 -> int1: the alizarin is not dependent.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the spacesuit is non-paranormal thing that is criminological.; sent2 & sent14 -> int3: that the spacesuit is not paranormal but it is criminological is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the alizarin is a kind of non-dependent thing that is consonantal is incorrect.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it is independent thing that is consonantal does not hold.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the apparatchik does incriminate Ozawa.; int7 & sent11 -> int8: the skivvy does chance replication.; int8 & sent4 -> int9: the Cheyenne is an ashtray.; sent3 -> int10: that the Cheyenne is a kind of a iron-tree that is not a propanal is not right if it is an ashtray.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the alizarin is a propanal.
$hypothesis$ = that the Cheyenne is a kind of a iron-tree but it is not a kind of a propanal does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the skivvy does incriminate Ozawa but it is not a deossification does not hold if it chances replication. sent2: if the serape is not a kind of a deossification then that the spacesuit is not paranormal and is criminological is incorrect. sent3: if something is an ashtray that it is a kind of a iron-tree and it is not a kind of a propanal is not true. sent4: if the skivvy does chance replication then the Cheyenne is a kind of an ashtray. sent5: if something does not incriminate Ozawa then that it is paranormal and/or is criminological is incorrect. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it is not dependent and it is consonantal is not correct then the apparatchik incriminates Ozawa. sent7: the spacesuit is non-paranormal and not non-criminological if the alizarin is not dependent. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is dependent and is consonantal is not right. sent9: the spacesuit is not independent if the apparatchik is both paranormal and not independent. sent10: if something is consonantal then it is not dependent. sent11: if the apparatchik does incriminate Ozawa the skivvy does chance replication. sent12: if the alizarin is not consonantal the fact that the spacesuit is both not criminological and a propanal does not hold. sent13: the Cheyenne is consonantal if there is something such that that it either is paranormal or is criminological or both is not right. sent14: the serape is not a deossification. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the alizarin is both not dependent and consonantal.; assump1 -> int1: the alizarin is not dependent.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the spacesuit is non-paranormal thing that is criminological.; sent2 & sent14 -> int3: that the spacesuit is not paranormal but it is criminological is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the alizarin is a kind of non-dependent thing that is consonantal is incorrect.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that that it is independent thing that is consonantal does not hold.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the apparatchik does incriminate Ozawa.; int7 & sent11 -> int8: the skivvy does chance replication.; int8 & sent4 -> int9: the Cheyenne is an ashtray.; sent3 -> int10: that the Cheyenne is a kind of a iron-tree that is not a propanal is not right if it is an ashtray.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__