the demoting supervision does not occur.
sent1: the demoting turmeric occurs. sent2: if both the non-icosahedralness and the proclamation happens the demoting supervision does not occur. sent3: the fact that the spitting does not occur is right if the proclamation does not occur and/or the icosahedralness does not occur. sent4: the icosahedralness does not occur if the mastering portwatcher and/or the spit occurs. sent5: the mastering chairmanship does not occur. sent6: that that the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur does not hold is not incorrect if the demoting turmeric occurs. sent7: that the proclamation and the inquisitorialness happens is brought about by that the mastering chairmanship does not occur. sent8: the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur if the mastering portwatcher does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mastering portwatcher does not occur.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: that the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the mastering portwatcher happens.; int4 -> int5: either the mastering portwatcher or the spitting or both happens.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the icosahedralness does not occur.; sent7 & sent5 -> int7: both the proclamation and the inquisitorialness occurs.; int7 -> int8: that the proclamation occurs is true.; int6 & int8 -> int9: not the icosahedralness but the proclamation occurs.; int9 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the Singaporeanness occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the demoting supervision does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the demoting turmeric occurs. sent2: if both the non-icosahedralness and the proclamation happens the demoting supervision does not occur. sent3: the fact that the spitting does not occur is right if the proclamation does not occur and/or the icosahedralness does not occur. sent4: the icosahedralness does not occur if the mastering portwatcher and/or the spit occurs. sent5: the mastering chairmanship does not occur. sent6: that that the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur does not hold is not incorrect if the demoting turmeric occurs. sent7: that the proclamation and the inquisitorialness happens is brought about by that the mastering chairmanship does not occur. sent8: the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur if the mastering portwatcher does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mastering portwatcher does not occur.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: that the theoterrorism does not occur and the propagandizing does not occur does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the mastering portwatcher happens.; int4 -> int5: either the mastering portwatcher or the spitting or both happens.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the icosahedralness does not occur.; sent7 & sent5 -> int7: both the proclamation and the inquisitorialness occurs.; int7 -> int8: that the proclamation occurs is true.; int6 & int8 -> int9: not the icosahedralness but the proclamation occurs.; int9 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__