the fact that the concerting does not occur and the contamination does not occur is not correct.
sent1: that the inflating kit happens is prevented by the humoralness. sent2: that the Michelangelesqueness does not occur is brought about by that the concert does not occur and the contamination does not occur. sent3: that the humoralness occurs causes that the concerting does not occur and the contamination does not occur. sent4: the seclusion occurs if the inflating blaring occurs. sent5: if the remembering and the seclusion happens then the clouding syllogism does not occur. sent6: if that the non-humoralness and the non-ambassadorialness happens is not true the inflating kit does not occur. sent7: the inflating blaring and the macroeconomicsness occurs. sent8: the remembering and the haircut occurs. sent9: if the Michelangelesqueness does not occur then the fact that the humoralness does not occur and the ambassadorialness does not occur is not right. sent10: that the upholding occurs and the clouding syllogism happens is brought about by that the inflating kit does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the concerting does not occur and the contamination does not occur.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the Michelangelesqueness does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the fact that both the non-humoralness and the non-ambassadorialness occurs does not hold.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the inflating kit does not occur.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: that the upholding happens and the clouding syllogism occurs is true.; int4 -> int5: the clouding syllogism occurs.; sent8 -> int6: the remembering occurs.; sent7 -> int7: the inflating blaring happens.; sent4 & int7 -> int8: the seclusion occurs.; int6 & int8 -> int9: the remembering and the seclusion happens.; sent5 & int9 -> int10: the clouding syllogism does not occur.; int5 & int10 -> int11: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int11 -> hypothesis;
the concert does not occur and the contamination does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the concerting does not occur and the contamination does not occur is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that the inflating kit happens is prevented by the humoralness. sent2: that the Michelangelesqueness does not occur is brought about by that the concert does not occur and the contamination does not occur. sent3: that the humoralness occurs causes that the concerting does not occur and the contamination does not occur. sent4: the seclusion occurs if the inflating blaring occurs. sent5: if the remembering and the seclusion happens then the clouding syllogism does not occur. sent6: if that the non-humoralness and the non-ambassadorialness happens is not true the inflating kit does not occur. sent7: the inflating blaring and the macroeconomicsness occurs. sent8: the remembering and the haircut occurs. sent9: if the Michelangelesqueness does not occur then the fact that the humoralness does not occur and the ambassadorialness does not occur is not right. sent10: that the upholding occurs and the clouding syllogism happens is brought about by that the inflating kit does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the concerting does not occur and the contamination does not occur.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the Michelangelesqueness does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the fact that both the non-humoralness and the non-ambassadorialness occurs does not hold.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the inflating kit does not occur.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: that the upholding happens and the clouding syllogism occurs is true.; int4 -> int5: the clouding syllogism occurs.; sent8 -> int6: the remembering occurs.; sent7 -> int7: the inflating blaring happens.; sent4 & int7 -> int8: the seclusion occurs.; int6 & int8 -> int9: the remembering and the seclusion happens.; sent5 & int9 -> int10: the clouding syllogism does not occur.; int5 & int10 -> int11: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__