the fight does not occur.
sent1: that the archaisticness happens is not wrong if the wholesale happens. sent2: if the wholesaling does not occur and the archaisticness does not occur then the fighting occurs. sent3: if the dissenting wpm does not occur the fact that that both the custodianship and the interception occurs does not hold is right. sent4: if the incomprehensibleness occurs the fact that both the non-metamorphousness and the infusion occurs is incorrect. sent5: the wholesaling occurs. sent6: that that both the archaisticness and the fight occurs hold leads to that the interception does not occur. sent7: if the infusion does not occur the interception and the custodianship occurs. sent8: the non-metamorphousness and the dissenting wpm occurs. sent9: that not the metamorphousness but the dissenting wpm occurs brings about that the infusion does not occur.
sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the archaisticness occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fight occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: both the archaisticness and the fight occurs.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the interception does not occur.; sent9 & sent8 -> int4: the infusion does not occur.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the interception and the custodianship occurs.; int5 -> int6: the interception happens.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the fight happens.
$hypothesis$ = the fight does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the archaisticness happens is not wrong if the wholesale happens. sent2: if the wholesaling does not occur and the archaisticness does not occur then the fighting occurs. sent3: if the dissenting wpm does not occur the fact that that both the custodianship and the interception occurs does not hold is right. sent4: if the incomprehensibleness occurs the fact that both the non-metamorphousness and the infusion occurs is incorrect. sent5: the wholesaling occurs. sent6: that that both the archaisticness and the fight occurs hold leads to that the interception does not occur. sent7: if the infusion does not occur the interception and the custodianship occurs. sent8: the non-metamorphousness and the dissenting wpm occurs. sent9: that not the metamorphousness but the dissenting wpm occurs brings about that the infusion does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the archaisticness occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fight occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: both the archaisticness and the fight occurs.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the interception does not occur.; sent9 & sent8 -> int4: the infusion does not occur.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the interception and the custodianship occurs.; int5 -> int6: the interception happens.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__