the trafficking tuna but not the catholicness occurs.
sent1: the non-endoergicness is caused by that the expiring but not the redirecting waxwork happens. sent2: if the brahminicness happens then the trafficking tuna occurs. sent3: the cryonicsness yields that the nonwoodiness does not occur and/or the singling. sent4: that the outflow does not occur is brought about by that the seraphicness does not occur and the internationalization does not occur. sent5: the trafficking Nepidae occurs. sent6: the fact that both the unavailableness and the catholicness happens is false if the outflow does not occur. sent7: if the nonwoodiness does not occur and/or the single occurs then the seraphicness does not occur. sent8: if the trafficking syncytium does not occur that the e-commerce happens and the comeback happens does not hold. sent9: if the endoergicness does not occur then that the non-cryonicsness and the trafficking Ptilonorhynchidae occurs is not correct. sent10: the internationalization does not occur. sent11: the seraphicness does not occur and the internationalization does not occur. sent12: the cryonicsness happens if that the cryonicsnessness and the trafficking Ptilonorhynchidae happens is wrong. sent13: the catholicness does not occur if the fact that both the unavailableness and the catholicness happens is incorrect. sent14: that both the non-seraphicness and the internationalization happens leads to that the outflow does not occur. sent15: if the hungriness does not occur the trafficking Nepidae occurs. sent16: the brahminicness occurs if the hungriness occurs. sent17: the trafficking Nepidae and the hungriness occurs.
sent17 -> int1: the fact that the hungriness occurs is not incorrect.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the brahminicness happens.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the trafficking tuna occurs.; sent4 & sent11 -> int4: the outflow does not occur.; sent6 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the fact that both the unavailableness and the catholicness occurs is false is correct.; sent13 & int5 -> int6: the catholicness does not occur.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis;
that both the trafficking tuna and the non-catholicness happens does not hold.
$hypothesis$ = the trafficking tuna but not the catholicness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the non-endoergicness is caused by that the expiring but not the redirecting waxwork happens. sent2: if the brahminicness happens then the trafficking tuna occurs. sent3: the cryonicsness yields that the nonwoodiness does not occur and/or the singling. sent4: that the outflow does not occur is brought about by that the seraphicness does not occur and the internationalization does not occur. sent5: the trafficking Nepidae occurs. sent6: the fact that both the unavailableness and the catholicness happens is false if the outflow does not occur. sent7: if the nonwoodiness does not occur and/or the single occurs then the seraphicness does not occur. sent8: if the trafficking syncytium does not occur that the e-commerce happens and the comeback happens does not hold. sent9: if the endoergicness does not occur then that the non-cryonicsness and the trafficking Ptilonorhynchidae occurs is not correct. sent10: the internationalization does not occur. sent11: the seraphicness does not occur and the internationalization does not occur. sent12: the cryonicsness happens if that the cryonicsnessness and the trafficking Ptilonorhynchidae happens is wrong. sent13: the catholicness does not occur if the fact that both the unavailableness and the catholicness happens is incorrect. sent14: that both the non-seraphicness and the internationalization happens leads to that the outflow does not occur. sent15: if the hungriness does not occur the trafficking Nepidae occurs. sent16: the brahminicness occurs if the hungriness occurs. sent17: the trafficking Nepidae and the hungriness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 -> int1: the fact that the hungriness occurs is not incorrect.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the brahminicness happens.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the trafficking tuna occurs.; sent4 & sent11 -> int4: the outflow does not occur.; sent6 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the fact that both the unavailableness and the catholicness occurs is false is correct.; sent13 & int5 -> int6: the catholicness does not occur.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__