that if the digestive occurs then the extraordinariness happens is not right.
sent1: the brazening hedger but not the perking happens. sent2: if the digestiveness happens the defining happens. sent3: that the extraordinariness does not occur is prevented by that not the perking but the defining happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the digestiveness occurs.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the defining occurs.; sent1 -> int2: the perking does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the perking does not occur but the defining happens.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the extraordinariness occurs.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the digestive occurs then the extraordinariness happens is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the brazening hedger but not the perking happens. sent2: if the digestiveness happens the defining happens. sent3: that the extraordinariness does not occur is prevented by that not the perking but the defining happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the digestiveness occurs.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the defining occurs.; sent1 -> int2: the perking does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the perking does not occur but the defining happens.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the extraordinariness occurs.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__