the fact that the incriminating hierarchy does not occur if the sticking impracticality happens does not hold.
sent1: the Tibetanness happens. sent2: the apocalypticness does not occur but the composite happens. sent3: the ergonomicness occurs. sent4: the incriminating hierarchy leads to that the sticking impracticality does not occur but the axiomaticness happens. sent5: the sticking loaded happens. sent6: the incriminating constancy does not occur. sent7: if the riddling transportation does not occur then the incriminating hierarchy happens and the low-resolutionness happens. sent8: if the flare happens not the behooving but the implosion happens.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the incriminating hierarchy happens.; sent4 & assump2 -> int1: the sticking impracticality does not occur but the axiomaticness happens.; int1 -> int2: the sticking impracticality does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sticking impracticality happens.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int3 -> int4: that the incriminating hierarchy does not occur is right.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the low-resolutionness occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the incriminating hierarchy does not occur if the sticking impracticality happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the Tibetanness happens. sent2: the apocalypticness does not occur but the composite happens. sent3: the ergonomicness occurs. sent4: the incriminating hierarchy leads to that the sticking impracticality does not occur but the axiomaticness happens. sent5: the sticking loaded happens. sent6: the incriminating constancy does not occur. sent7: if the riddling transportation does not occur then the incriminating hierarchy happens and the low-resolutionness happens. sent8: if the flare happens not the behooving but the implosion happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the incriminating hierarchy happens.; sent4 & assump2 -> int1: the sticking impracticality does not occur but the axiomaticness happens.; int1 -> int2: the sticking impracticality does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sticking impracticality happens.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int3 -> int4: that the incriminating hierarchy does not occur is right.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__