the homosexual is a renegade.
sent1: if the sommelier is a kind of a directness then it is pharyngeal. sent2: the fact that the selvage is mensural and it pieces reactivity does not hold. sent3: if the selvage is not unrhetorical then the thunderer pieces Raskolnikov and is a directness. sent4: the sommelier is not rhetorical if that the selvage is mensural but it does not piece reactivity is not correct. sent5: if the selvage is unrhetorical and it is a Tenniel it does not piece reactivity. sent6: the sommelier does not piece Raskolnikov if it is a kind of a Tenniel that is pharyngeal. sent7: the sommelier pieces Raskolnikov. sent8: the fact that the selvage is mensural and does not piece reactivity is incorrect. sent9: if the sommelier is not rhetorical it is a kind of a directness. sent10: the fact that something is a Tenniel and not pharyngeal does not hold if it is not a renegade. sent11: the homosexual is a kind of a renegade if the sommelier is not a Tenniel. sent12: The Raskolnikov pieces sommelier.
sent4 & sent8 -> int1: the sommelier is unrhetorical.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the sommelier is a directness.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the fact that the sommelier is pharyngeal is true.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sommelier is a Tenniel.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the sommelier is a kind of a Tenniel and it is pharyngeal.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the sommelier does not piece Raskolnikov.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the sommelier is not a Tenniel is not wrong.; int7 & sent11 -> hypothesis;
the thunderer pieces Raskolnikov.
sent10 -> int8: that the sommelier is a kind of a Tenniel that is not pharyngeal does not hold if it is not a kind of a renegade.;
$hypothesis$ = the homosexual is a renegade. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sommelier is a kind of a directness then it is pharyngeal. sent2: the fact that the selvage is mensural and it pieces reactivity does not hold. sent3: if the selvage is not unrhetorical then the thunderer pieces Raskolnikov and is a directness. sent4: the sommelier is not rhetorical if that the selvage is mensural but it does not piece reactivity is not correct. sent5: if the selvage is unrhetorical and it is a Tenniel it does not piece reactivity. sent6: the sommelier does not piece Raskolnikov if it is a kind of a Tenniel that is pharyngeal. sent7: the sommelier pieces Raskolnikov. sent8: the fact that the selvage is mensural and does not piece reactivity is incorrect. sent9: if the sommelier is not rhetorical it is a kind of a directness. sent10: the fact that something is a Tenniel and not pharyngeal does not hold if it is not a renegade. sent11: the homosexual is a kind of a renegade if the sommelier is not a Tenniel. sent12: The Raskolnikov pieces sommelier. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent8 -> int1: the sommelier is unrhetorical.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the sommelier is a directness.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: the fact that the sommelier is pharyngeal is true.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sommelier is a Tenniel.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: the sommelier is a kind of a Tenniel and it is pharyngeal.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the sommelier does not piece Raskolnikov.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the sommelier is not a Tenniel is not wrong.; int7 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__