the fact that the intruding repudiation does not occur is true.
sent1: the fact that the comforting vagrant occurs but the galumphing does not occur does not hold. sent2: the fact that the words occurs is not incorrect. sent3: that the words and the excluding happens is triggered by that the Ptolemaicness does not occur. sent4: the Ptolemaicness does not occur. sent5: the intruding repudiation does not occur and the excluding happens if the words does not occur. sent6: that the overhandness does not occur and the comforting psilophyton does not occur yields that the Paraguayanness does not occur. sent7: if the achondriticness happens the words does not occur but the Ptolemaicness occurs. sent8: that the oncologicalness and the sweetening Sundanese occurs is incorrect if the intruding repudiation does not occur. sent9: the fact that both the excluding and the intruding repudiation happens is wrong if the words does not occur. sent10: if that the fact that the excluding and the intruding repudiation happens is correct is false then the listing does not occur. sent11: if the intruding repudiation does not occur then that the fact that the oncologicalness but not the sweetening Sundanese happens hold is not right. sent12: the excluding does not occur if the fact that the oncologicalness but not the sweetening Sundanese happens is incorrect. sent13: if the Paraguayanness does not occur the sisterliness or the wilting or both happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the intruding repudiation does not occur.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the oncologicalness occurs and the sweetening Sundanese does not occur is wrong.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the excluding does not occur.; sent3 & sent4 -> int3: the words happens and the excluding occurs.; int3 -> int4: the excluding happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the listing does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the intruding repudiation does not occur is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the comforting vagrant occurs but the galumphing does not occur does not hold. sent2: the fact that the words occurs is not incorrect. sent3: that the words and the excluding happens is triggered by that the Ptolemaicness does not occur. sent4: the Ptolemaicness does not occur. sent5: the intruding repudiation does not occur and the excluding happens if the words does not occur. sent6: that the overhandness does not occur and the comforting psilophyton does not occur yields that the Paraguayanness does not occur. sent7: if the achondriticness happens the words does not occur but the Ptolemaicness occurs. sent8: that the oncologicalness and the sweetening Sundanese occurs is incorrect if the intruding repudiation does not occur. sent9: the fact that both the excluding and the intruding repudiation happens is wrong if the words does not occur. sent10: if that the fact that the excluding and the intruding repudiation happens is correct is false then the listing does not occur. sent11: if the intruding repudiation does not occur then that the fact that the oncologicalness but not the sweetening Sundanese happens hold is not right. sent12: the excluding does not occur if the fact that the oncologicalness but not the sweetening Sundanese happens is incorrect. sent13: if the Paraguayanness does not occur the sisterliness or the wilting or both happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the intruding repudiation does not occur.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the oncologicalness occurs and the sweetening Sundanese does not occur is wrong.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the excluding does not occur.; sent3 & sent4 -> int3: the words happens and the excluding occurs.; int3 -> int4: the excluding happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__