that the shopping ade occurs leads to that the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur.
sent1: that the bogging hydrocortisone happens is caused by the shopping ade. sent2: the bogging hydrocortisone and the mutableness occurs if the Aberdonianness does not occur. sent3: if that the infixing roarer and the ferialness happens is not correct then the fact that the nonattendance does not occur is not wrong. sent4: if the regulation occurs but the kwanza does not occur the capering handiness does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the inorganicness and the touchdown happens is not right then the ipsilateralness does not occur. sent6: if the bogging hydrocortisone occurs then that not the shopping ade but the hitting happens is false. sent7: if the hitting does not occur then the fact that the shopping packaged but not the maneuver happens is false. sent8: if that the hit happens and the shopping ade occurs is not true then the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur. sent9: the bogging hydrocortisone happens if the fact that the hitting occurs and the shopping ade does not occur is incorrect. sent10: the hitting happens. sent11: the fact that the cephalometry happens but the assertion does not occur is not true. sent12: the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur if the hitting occurs and the shopping ade does not occur. sent13: if the hit does not occur then the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur. sent14: that the Aberdonianness does not occur and the shopping lumberjack occurs is triggered by that the careering does not occur. sent15: the fact that the deductibleness does not occur is not incorrect.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the hitting but not the shopping ade occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the shopping ade does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shopping ade occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the hit happens and the shopping ade does not occur is not true.;
the fact that the shopping packaged occurs but the maneuver does not occur is not right.
$hypothesis$ = that the shopping ade occurs leads to that the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the bogging hydrocortisone happens is caused by the shopping ade. sent2: the bogging hydrocortisone and the mutableness occurs if the Aberdonianness does not occur. sent3: if that the infixing roarer and the ferialness happens is not correct then the fact that the nonattendance does not occur is not wrong. sent4: if the regulation occurs but the kwanza does not occur the capering handiness does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the inorganicness and the touchdown happens is not right then the ipsilateralness does not occur. sent6: if the bogging hydrocortisone occurs then that not the shopping ade but the hitting happens is false. sent7: if the hitting does not occur then the fact that the shopping packaged but not the maneuver happens is false. sent8: if that the hit happens and the shopping ade occurs is not true then the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur. sent9: the bogging hydrocortisone happens if the fact that the hitting occurs and the shopping ade does not occur is incorrect. sent10: the hitting happens. sent11: the fact that the cephalometry happens but the assertion does not occur is not true. sent12: the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur if the hitting occurs and the shopping ade does not occur. sent13: if the hit does not occur then the bogging hydrocortisone does not occur. sent14: that the Aberdonianness does not occur and the shopping lumberjack occurs is triggered by that the careering does not occur. sent15: the fact that the deductibleness does not occur is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the hitting but not the shopping ade occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the shopping ade does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shopping ade occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the hit happens and the shopping ade does not occur is not true.; __UNKNOWN__