the fact that the argyle is not wasteful is not incorrect.
sent1: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a Lothario hold then either the argyle is not a Lothario or it is not half or both. sent2: if the roulette is phocine the fact that it does burglarize contempt and it is not a kind of a Lothario does not hold. sent3: the fact that the roulette does burglarize contempt but it is not a kind of a Lothario is wrong. sent4: there is something such that it gloms. sent5: the fact that something burglarizes contempt and is not a Lothario does not hold if it is phocine. sent6: if something is phocine then that it does not burglarize contempt and is a Lothario does not hold. sent7: something is wasteful and does eviscerate if it does not burglarize contempt. sent8: that the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is a Lothario is incorrect. sent9: something does hunger roulette. sent10: if the aneroid eviscerates then it does not burglarize contempt. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not eviscerate the argyle is not a half. sent12: the argyle is not a half. sent13: something eviscerates. sent14: if something hungers roulette the roulette is phocine. sent15: the fact that something does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario is not right if it is phocine. sent16: if the fact that the roulette is phocine is correct the fact that it does not burglarize contempt and is a Lothario is not correct. sent17: if there is something such that it does hunger roulette and/or is not a kind of a Lothario then the aneroid is not a kind of a Lothario. sent18: there exists something such that it hungers roulette and/or it is not a Lothario. sent19: if the aneroid does not burglarize contempt then the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is not a kind of a Lothario. sent20: if there is something such that it does not eviscerate the argyle is not a kind of a half and it is not wasteful.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the aneroid does eviscerate.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the aneroid does not burglarize contempt.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario.; sent15 -> int3: if the roulette is phocine then the fact that it does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario is wrong.; sent9 & sent14 -> int4: the roulette is phocine.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario is incorrect.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the aneroid does not eviscerate.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it does not eviscerate.; int8 & sent20 -> int9: the argyle is non-half and is not wasteful.; int9 -> hypothesis;
the argyle is wasteful.
sent7 -> int10: if the argyle does not burglarize contempt then it is wasteful thing that eviscerates.; sent18 & sent17 -> int11: the aneroid is not a Lothario.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that it is not a Lothario.; int12 & sent1 -> int13: the argyle is not a Lothario or not half or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the argyle is not wasteful is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a Lothario hold then either the argyle is not a Lothario or it is not half or both. sent2: if the roulette is phocine the fact that it does burglarize contempt and it is not a kind of a Lothario does not hold. sent3: the fact that the roulette does burglarize contempt but it is not a kind of a Lothario is wrong. sent4: there is something such that it gloms. sent5: the fact that something burglarizes contempt and is not a Lothario does not hold if it is phocine. sent6: if something is phocine then that it does not burglarize contempt and is a Lothario does not hold. sent7: something is wasteful and does eviscerate if it does not burglarize contempt. sent8: that the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is a Lothario is incorrect. sent9: something does hunger roulette. sent10: if the aneroid eviscerates then it does not burglarize contempt. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not eviscerate the argyle is not a half. sent12: the argyle is not a half. sent13: something eviscerates. sent14: if something hungers roulette the roulette is phocine. sent15: the fact that something does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario is not right if it is phocine. sent16: if the fact that the roulette is phocine is correct the fact that it does not burglarize contempt and is a Lothario is not correct. sent17: if there is something such that it does hunger roulette and/or is not a kind of a Lothario then the aneroid is not a kind of a Lothario. sent18: there exists something such that it hungers roulette and/or it is not a Lothario. sent19: if the aneroid does not burglarize contempt then the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is not a kind of a Lothario. sent20: if there is something such that it does not eviscerate the argyle is not a kind of a half and it is not wasteful. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the aneroid does eviscerate.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the aneroid does not burglarize contempt.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario.; sent15 -> int3: if the roulette is phocine then the fact that it does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario is wrong.; sent9 & sent14 -> int4: the roulette is phocine.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the roulette does not burglarize contempt and is not a Lothario is incorrect.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the aneroid does not eviscerate.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it does not eviscerate.; int8 & sent20 -> int9: the argyle is non-half and is not wasteful.; int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__