the fact that the fact that that not the stabling trap but the eventuality happens is incorrect hold if the binariness does not occur is not correct.
sent1: that not the anamnesticness but the risking Potamogeton happens is false if the lingual does not occur. sent2: that the pentatonicness occurs is not wrong. sent3: that the fact that the pilgrimage does not occur but the wastefulness happens is false is right if the roboticness does not occur. sent4: that the stabling Tillich does not occur leads to that both the myopathicness and the lowbornness happens. sent5: if the myopathicness occurs then both the non-roboticness and the non-binaryness happens. sent6: that the stabling trap does not occur but the eventuality happens is not true if the binariness happens. sent7: if not the stabling trap but the eventuality happens then the binariness happens. sent8: if the stabling trap occurs and the eventuality happens then the binariness occurs. sent9: not the repainting but the crustoseness happens if the missionariness does not occur. sent10: the fact that the fact that the stabling trap occurs and the eventuality occurs is true is not right if the binary does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stabling trap does not occur and the eventuality happens.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the binary happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the binariness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the stabling trap does not occur but the eventuality occurs is false.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis;
that the pilgrimage does not occur and the wastefulness occurs is not correct.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that that not the stabling trap but the eventuality happens is incorrect hold if the binariness does not occur is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that not the anamnesticness but the risking Potamogeton happens is false if the lingual does not occur. sent2: that the pentatonicness occurs is not wrong. sent3: that the fact that the pilgrimage does not occur but the wastefulness happens is false is right if the roboticness does not occur. sent4: that the stabling Tillich does not occur leads to that both the myopathicness and the lowbornness happens. sent5: if the myopathicness occurs then both the non-roboticness and the non-binaryness happens. sent6: that the stabling trap does not occur but the eventuality happens is not true if the binariness happens. sent7: if not the stabling trap but the eventuality happens then the binariness happens. sent8: if the stabling trap occurs and the eventuality happens then the binariness occurs. sent9: not the repainting but the crustoseness happens if the missionariness does not occur. sent10: the fact that the fact that the stabling trap occurs and the eventuality occurs is true is not right if the binary does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stabling trap does not occur and the eventuality happens.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the binary happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the binariness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the stabling trap does not occur but the eventuality occurs is false.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__