the relining Kuwait does not occur.
sent1: if that the psychomotorness does not occur is correct then the shattering Tom happens and the tutelage happens. sent2: the proceduralness does not occur if the fact that the heliacalness does not occur and the welding respiration does not occur does not hold. sent3: if both the non-proceduralness and the non-heliacalness occurs the psychomotorness occurs. sent4: that the heliacalness does not occur and the welding respiration does not occur is not true if the crystallizing Cabernet occurs. sent5: the shattering Tom does not occur. sent6: the heliacalness occurs. sent7: if the fact that the heliacalness occurs is not incorrect then the proceduralness does not occur and the tutelage does not occur. sent8: if the meretriciousness does not occur that the welding respiration but not the crystallizing Cabernet happens is wrong. sent9: that the crystallizing rectangularity occurs and the shattering Tom does not occur causes that the tutelage occurs. sent10: that the welding respiration does not occur triggers that both the non-proceduralness and the non-heliacalness happens. sent11: the welding citizen and the non-meretriciousness happens if the umbelliformness occurs. sent12: if the fact that the welding respiration but not the crystallizing Cabernet happens is not true then the welding respiration does not occur. sent13: if the psychomotorness does not occur and/or the crystallizing rectangularity does not occur the relining Kuwait does not occur. sent14: if the fact that the shattering Tom occurs is not incorrect then the fact that the relining Kuwait does not occur but the crystallizing rectangularity happens is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the crystallizing rectangularity happens.; assump1 & sent5 -> int1: the crystallizing rectangularity happens but the shattering Tom does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the tutelage occurs.; sent7 & sent6 -> int3: the proceduralness does not occur and the tutelage does not occur.; int3 -> int4: the tutelage does not occur.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the crystallizing rectangularity does not occur.; int6 -> int7: either the psychomotorness does not occur or the crystallizing rectangularity does not occur or both.; int7 & sent13 -> hypothesis;
the relining Kuwait occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the relining Kuwait does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the psychomotorness does not occur is correct then the shattering Tom happens and the tutelage happens. sent2: the proceduralness does not occur if the fact that the heliacalness does not occur and the welding respiration does not occur does not hold. sent3: if both the non-proceduralness and the non-heliacalness occurs the psychomotorness occurs. sent4: that the heliacalness does not occur and the welding respiration does not occur is not true if the crystallizing Cabernet occurs. sent5: the shattering Tom does not occur. sent6: the heliacalness occurs. sent7: if the fact that the heliacalness occurs is not incorrect then the proceduralness does not occur and the tutelage does not occur. sent8: if the meretriciousness does not occur that the welding respiration but not the crystallizing Cabernet happens is wrong. sent9: that the crystallizing rectangularity occurs and the shattering Tom does not occur causes that the tutelage occurs. sent10: that the welding respiration does not occur triggers that both the non-proceduralness and the non-heliacalness happens. sent11: the welding citizen and the non-meretriciousness happens if the umbelliformness occurs. sent12: if the fact that the welding respiration but not the crystallizing Cabernet happens is not true then the welding respiration does not occur. sent13: if the psychomotorness does not occur and/or the crystallizing rectangularity does not occur the relining Kuwait does not occur. sent14: if the fact that the shattering Tom occurs is not incorrect then the fact that the relining Kuwait does not occur but the crystallizing rectangularity happens is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the crystallizing rectangularity happens.; assump1 & sent5 -> int1: the crystallizing rectangularity happens but the shattering Tom does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the tutelage occurs.; sent7 & sent6 -> int3: the proceduralness does not occur and the tutelage does not occur.; int3 -> int4: the tutelage does not occur.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the crystallizing rectangularity does not occur.; int6 -> int7: either the psychomotorness does not occur or the crystallizing rectangularity does not occur or both.; int7 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__