the endgame occurs but the diachronicness does not occur.
sent1: that the endgame occurs and the diachronicness occurs is not true. sent2: the unpublishableness occurs. sent3: the deserts happens. sent4: that the restrictiveness but not the unpublishableness happens prevents that the endgame does not occur. sent5: the fact that the restrictiveness does not occur is correct. sent6: if the restrictiveness does not occur the stagging and the unpublishableness occurs. sent7: if the endgame and the diachronicness happens the conjunctiveness happens. sent8: that the conjunctiveness happens is caused by that both the endgame and the non-diachronicness happens. sent9: if the fact that both the jetting Jungian and the conjunctiveness occurs does not hold then the jetting Jungian does not occur. sent10: the fact that the involvement does not occur is not incorrect. sent11: the fact that the blastomericness occurs and the discourtesy does not occur does not hold. sent12: if the fact that the unpublishableness does not occur is right the fact that both the jetting Jungian and the conjunctiveness happens is wrong. sent13: that the restrictiveness does not occur triggers the unpublishableness. sent14: that the Incanness occurs is brought about by that the asynchronousness happens and the ally does not occur. sent15: the stag does not occur if the conjunctiveness occurs. sent16: the non-asterismalness is prevented by that both the tobogganing and the non-sinistralness occurs. sent17: the lithographicness and the backing happens. sent18: the self-pollination does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the endgame but not the diachronicness happens.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the conjunctiveness occurs.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stagging does not occur.; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: both the stagging and the unpublishableness happens.; int3 -> int4: the stagging happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the endgame but not the diachronicness happens.
$hypothesis$ = the endgame occurs but the diachronicness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the endgame occurs and the diachronicness occurs is not true. sent2: the unpublishableness occurs. sent3: the deserts happens. sent4: that the restrictiveness but not the unpublishableness happens prevents that the endgame does not occur. sent5: the fact that the restrictiveness does not occur is correct. sent6: if the restrictiveness does not occur the stagging and the unpublishableness occurs. sent7: if the endgame and the diachronicness happens the conjunctiveness happens. sent8: that the conjunctiveness happens is caused by that both the endgame and the non-diachronicness happens. sent9: if the fact that both the jetting Jungian and the conjunctiveness occurs does not hold then the jetting Jungian does not occur. sent10: the fact that the involvement does not occur is not incorrect. sent11: the fact that the blastomericness occurs and the discourtesy does not occur does not hold. sent12: if the fact that the unpublishableness does not occur is right the fact that both the jetting Jungian and the conjunctiveness happens is wrong. sent13: that the restrictiveness does not occur triggers the unpublishableness. sent14: that the Incanness occurs is brought about by that the asynchronousness happens and the ally does not occur. sent15: the stag does not occur if the conjunctiveness occurs. sent16: the non-asterismalness is prevented by that both the tobogganing and the non-sinistralness occurs. sent17: the lithographicness and the backing happens. sent18: the self-pollination does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the endgame but not the diachronicness happens.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the conjunctiveness occurs.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stagging does not occur.; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: both the stagging and the unpublishableness happens.; int3 -> int4: the stagging happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__