both the factorizing undercharge and the anorectalness occurs.
sent1: if the circling Seminole happens the politicizing does not occur. sent2: the factorizing undercharge occurs if that the factorizing undercharge does not occur and the exemption occurs is incorrect. sent3: if the implementation happens then the clonus does not occur. sent4: if the anagogicness occurs the anorectalness happens. sent5: the carrotiness occurs. sent6: the carrotiness happens if the anagogicness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the fact that the factorizing undercharge occurs and the exemption occurs is not incorrect is not true if the misconduct does not occur. sent8: the locking occurs. sent9: the fact that the politicizing happens hold. sent10: the fact that not the factorizing undercharge but the exemption happens does not hold. sent11: both the horse-drawnness and the aculeateness happens if the purge does not occur. sent12: if the locking occurs the misconduct does not occur and the recoiling does not occur. sent13: the fact that the factorizing undercharge and the exemption occurs is not true. sent14: that the thwack happens and/or that the circling Seminole happens leads to that the politicizing does not occur. sent15: if the anagogicness does not occur then the carrotiness happens and the thwack happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the anagogicness does not occur.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the carrotiness and the thwack occurs.; int1 -> int2: the thwack occurs.; int2 -> int3: either the thwack occurs or the circling Seminole happens or both.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the politicizing does not occur.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the anagogicness happens.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the anorectalness happens.; sent2 & sent10 -> int8: the factorizing undercharge happens.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis;
the circling ultimatum occurs.
sent12 & sent8 -> int9: the misconduct does not occur and the recoiling does not occur.; int9 -> int10: the misconduct does not occur.; sent7 & int10 -> int11: the fact that that both the factorizing undercharge and the exemption happens is not true is not incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = both the factorizing undercharge and the anorectalness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the circling Seminole happens the politicizing does not occur. sent2: the factorizing undercharge occurs if that the factorizing undercharge does not occur and the exemption occurs is incorrect. sent3: if the implementation happens then the clonus does not occur. sent4: if the anagogicness occurs the anorectalness happens. sent5: the carrotiness occurs. sent6: the carrotiness happens if the anagogicness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the fact that the factorizing undercharge occurs and the exemption occurs is not incorrect is not true if the misconduct does not occur. sent8: the locking occurs. sent9: the fact that the politicizing happens hold. sent10: the fact that not the factorizing undercharge but the exemption happens does not hold. sent11: both the horse-drawnness and the aculeateness happens if the purge does not occur. sent12: if the locking occurs the misconduct does not occur and the recoiling does not occur. sent13: the fact that the factorizing undercharge and the exemption occurs is not true. sent14: that the thwack happens and/or that the circling Seminole happens leads to that the politicizing does not occur. sent15: if the anagogicness does not occur then the carrotiness happens and the thwack happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the anagogicness does not occur.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the carrotiness and the thwack occurs.; int1 -> int2: the thwack occurs.; int2 -> int3: either the thwack occurs or the circling Seminole happens or both.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the politicizing does not occur.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the anagogicness happens.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the anorectalness happens.; sent2 & sent10 -> int8: the factorizing undercharge happens.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__