if the ashcake does not crack then the phosgene is a kind of a jezebel and concocts.
sent1: if the flurry is not a Wimbledon then the phosgene does destabilize and it is a chronology. sent2: the kirtle is a cracking. sent3: the phosgene does underlie. sent4: something concocts if it is a kind of a chronology. sent5: the phosgene destabilizes. sent6: the phosgene is a jezebel if that the kirtle is not staccato is false. sent7: the kirtle underlies and is staccato if the ashcake is not a cracking. sent8: the kirtle does underlie. sent9: that the kirtle is a chronology and it is a jezebel if the phosgene does not concoct is not incorrect. sent10: the flurry is not a Wimbledon. sent11: the kirtle underlies and is a Wimbledon.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ashcake is not a cracking.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: that the kirtle does underlie and it is staccato hold.; int1 -> int2: the kirtle is staccato.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the phosgene is a jezebel.; sent4 -> int4: if the phosgene is a chronology it does concoct.; sent1 & sent10 -> int5: the phosgene does destabilize and is a kind of a chronology.; int5 -> int6: the phosgene is a chronology.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the phosgene does concoct.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the phosgene is a kind of a jezebel that concocts.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if the ashcake does not crack then the phosgene is a kind of a jezebel and concocts. ; $context$ = sent1: if the flurry is not a Wimbledon then the phosgene does destabilize and it is a chronology. sent2: the kirtle is a cracking. sent3: the phosgene does underlie. sent4: something concocts if it is a kind of a chronology. sent5: the phosgene destabilizes. sent6: the phosgene is a jezebel if that the kirtle is not staccato is false. sent7: the kirtle underlies and is staccato if the ashcake is not a cracking. sent8: the kirtle does underlie. sent9: that the kirtle is a chronology and it is a jezebel if the phosgene does not concoct is not incorrect. sent10: the flurry is not a Wimbledon. sent11: the kirtle underlies and is a Wimbledon. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ashcake is not a cracking.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: that the kirtle does underlie and it is staccato hold.; int1 -> int2: the kirtle is staccato.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the phosgene is a jezebel.; sent4 -> int4: if the phosgene is a chronology it does concoct.; sent1 & sent10 -> int5: the phosgene does destabilize and is a kind of a chronology.; int5 -> int6: the phosgene is a chronology.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the phosgene does concoct.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the phosgene is a kind of a jezebel that concocts.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__