the quenching bluffness does not occur.
sent1: if the quenching masturbator does not occur then the fact that the incorrectness and the quenching bluffness happens is not true. sent2: that the quenching ethnic does not occur triggers that the solfege occurs and the enacting Lammastide occurs. sent3: that the solfege occurs prevents that the pilot does not occur. sent4: that the quenching stewardship happens prevents that the quenching masturbator does not occur. sent5: if the quenching masturbator happens the incorrectness happens. sent6: that the demising Ederle occurs is not right. sent7: if that the bag occurs hold the mnemonicsness happens. sent8: the quenching ethnic does not occur. sent9: the carvel-builtness happens. sent10: the fact that the icebreaker and the jingoism occurs does not hold. sent11: the quenching masturbator happens if that that the fact that the hauling but not the quenching stewardship occurs is not wrong is not right is true. sent12: if the stampeding fade does not occur the fact that the demising Ederle does not occur but the solfege happens is wrong. sent13: the demising Ederle happens if the incorrectness occurs and/or the solfege does not occur. sent14: the unsentness happens. sent15: if the mnemonicsness happens the quenching ethnic does not occur. sent16: the quenching bluffness occurs if the hauling but not the quenching stewardship happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the hauling but not the quenching stewardship occurs does not hold.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the quenching masturbator occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the incorrectness occurs.; int2 -> int3: the incorrectness occurs and/or the solfege does not occur.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the demising Ederle occurs.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the hauling but not the quenching stewardship happens.; int6 & sent16 -> hypothesis;
the pilot but not the chairmanship occurs.
sent2 & sent8 -> int7: both the solfege and the enacting Lammastide happens.; int7 -> int8: the solfege happens.; sent3 & int8 -> int9: the pilot happens.;
$hypothesis$ = the quenching bluffness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the quenching masturbator does not occur then the fact that the incorrectness and the quenching bluffness happens is not true. sent2: that the quenching ethnic does not occur triggers that the solfege occurs and the enacting Lammastide occurs. sent3: that the solfege occurs prevents that the pilot does not occur. sent4: that the quenching stewardship happens prevents that the quenching masturbator does not occur. sent5: if the quenching masturbator happens the incorrectness happens. sent6: that the demising Ederle occurs is not right. sent7: if that the bag occurs hold the mnemonicsness happens. sent8: the quenching ethnic does not occur. sent9: the carvel-builtness happens. sent10: the fact that the icebreaker and the jingoism occurs does not hold. sent11: the quenching masturbator happens if that that the fact that the hauling but not the quenching stewardship occurs is not wrong is not right is true. sent12: if the stampeding fade does not occur the fact that the demising Ederle does not occur but the solfege happens is wrong. sent13: the demising Ederle happens if the incorrectness occurs and/or the solfege does not occur. sent14: the unsentness happens. sent15: if the mnemonicsness happens the quenching ethnic does not occur. sent16: the quenching bluffness occurs if the hauling but not the quenching stewardship happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the hauling but not the quenching stewardship occurs does not hold.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the quenching masturbator occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the incorrectness occurs.; int2 -> int3: the incorrectness occurs and/or the solfege does not occur.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the demising Ederle occurs.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the hauling but not the quenching stewardship happens.; int6 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__