if the lard does not dogmatize then the ruin is either a prosecutor or not an optometrist or both.
sent1: the ruin is not odorous and it is not heedful. sent2: the lard is not heedful. sent3: the ruin is not heedful. sent4: the lard is a kind of non-Nestorian thing that does not index Dagda. sent5: the ruin is an optometrist if the lard does not dogmatize and is not heedful. sent6: the lard is non-heedful if the ruin does not dogmatize and is not a kind of a prosecutor. sent7: the ruin does not drowse and does not index Ramachandra. sent8: the ruin is a kind of a prosecutor and/or is not an optometrist if the lard does dogmatize. sent9: the partner is not a prosecutor. sent10: the ruin does not confine and it does not index bobtail. sent11: if the lard is not a prosecutor the ruin either is heedful or does not dogmatize or both. sent12: if the lard dogmatizes and is not heedful the ruin is not a kind of an optometrist. sent13: the ruin is not a timid. sent14: the ruin is either a prosecutor or an optometrist or both. sent15: the RF is not a kind of an optometrist. sent16: if the lard does not dogmatize then the ruin is a prosecutor or it is a kind of an optometrist or both. sent17: the egocentric is not heedful.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lard does not dogmatize.; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: the lard does not dogmatize and it is not heedful.;
$hypothesis$ = if the lard does not dogmatize then the ruin is either a prosecutor or not an optometrist or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the ruin is not odorous and it is not heedful. sent2: the lard is not heedful. sent3: the ruin is not heedful. sent4: the lard is a kind of non-Nestorian thing that does not index Dagda. sent5: the ruin is an optometrist if the lard does not dogmatize and is not heedful. sent6: the lard is non-heedful if the ruin does not dogmatize and is not a kind of a prosecutor. sent7: the ruin does not drowse and does not index Ramachandra. sent8: the ruin is a kind of a prosecutor and/or is not an optometrist if the lard does dogmatize. sent9: the partner is not a prosecutor. sent10: the ruin does not confine and it does not index bobtail. sent11: if the lard is not a prosecutor the ruin either is heedful or does not dogmatize or both. sent12: if the lard dogmatizes and is not heedful the ruin is not a kind of an optometrist. sent13: the ruin is not a timid. sent14: the ruin is either a prosecutor or an optometrist or both. sent15: the RF is not a kind of an optometrist. sent16: if the lard does not dogmatize then the ruin is a prosecutor or it is a kind of an optometrist or both. sent17: the egocentric is not heedful. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lard does not dogmatize.; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: the lard does not dogmatize and it is not heedful.; __UNKNOWN__