that the insistence occurs is caused by that the recission happens.
sent1: the dinging bilges does not occur if the fact that not the hiss but the upper-classness occurs is incorrect. sent2: the outgeneraling Staphylinidae happens if the creaseproofness does not occur and the dinging conventioneer does not occur. sent3: the fact that the turnover does not occur and the objecting oldwench does not occur is false. sent4: that the temperateness happens yields that the navigating happens. sent5: the fact that the quadrille happens is not incorrect if that that the cracking does not occur and the hijack does not occur is not false is not correct. sent6: the pelting occurs. sent7: the headquartering thirst occurs. sent8: the non-unpaintableness is prevented by that the sarcosomalness does not occur and the vice-presidency does not occur. sent9: that if the fact that the lashing does not occur and the recission does not occur does not hold the insistence occurs is correct. sent10: that the lashing occurs is caused by that the insistence occurs or that the recission does not occur or both. sent11: the fact that both the non-afloatness and the instructions occurs is not true. sent12: that not the hiss but the upper-classness happens does not hold if that the outgeneraling antidiabetic does not occur hold. sent13: if the lashing happens that the dinging ginkgo does not occur and the kineticness does not occur is incorrect. sent14: that not the outgeneraling gangrene but the headquartering thirst occurs is false. sent15: the fact that the dinging intermediate does not occur but the stroking occurs is not right. sent16: the insistence occurs and/or the recission does not occur if the dinging bilges does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lashing does not occur and the recission does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the recission does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the recission occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the lashing does not occur and the recission does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the insistence happens.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis;
that the dinging ginkgo does not occur and the kineticness does not occur is incorrect.
$hypothesis$ = that the insistence occurs is caused by that the recission happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the dinging bilges does not occur if the fact that not the hiss but the upper-classness occurs is incorrect. sent2: the outgeneraling Staphylinidae happens if the creaseproofness does not occur and the dinging conventioneer does not occur. sent3: the fact that the turnover does not occur and the objecting oldwench does not occur is false. sent4: that the temperateness happens yields that the navigating happens. sent5: the fact that the quadrille happens is not incorrect if that that the cracking does not occur and the hijack does not occur is not false is not correct. sent6: the pelting occurs. sent7: the headquartering thirst occurs. sent8: the non-unpaintableness is prevented by that the sarcosomalness does not occur and the vice-presidency does not occur. sent9: that if the fact that the lashing does not occur and the recission does not occur does not hold the insistence occurs is correct. sent10: that the lashing occurs is caused by that the insistence occurs or that the recission does not occur or both. sent11: the fact that both the non-afloatness and the instructions occurs is not true. sent12: that not the hiss but the upper-classness happens does not hold if that the outgeneraling antidiabetic does not occur hold. sent13: if the lashing happens that the dinging ginkgo does not occur and the kineticness does not occur is incorrect. sent14: that not the outgeneraling gangrene but the headquartering thirst occurs is false. sent15: the fact that the dinging intermediate does not occur but the stroking occurs is not right. sent16: the insistence occurs and/or the recission does not occur if the dinging bilges does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lashing does not occur and the recission does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the recission does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the recission occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the lashing does not occur and the recission does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the insistence happens.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__