if the nectariferousness occurs the ineffectiveness happens.
sent1: not the beating anomia but the IW occurs. sent2: if the tracheostomy occurs that the hypophysectomy happens hold. sent3: the monotonicness does not occur. sent4: the belling occurs. sent5: the ineffectiveness happens if not the fudging orderliness but the nectariferousness happens. sent6: if the ineffectiveness does not occur either the fudging orderliness occurs or the nectariferousness occurs or both. sent7: the fact that the fudging rangeland happens is not wrong. sent8: the informalness occurs. sent9: the fact that the lesserness occurs and the getting occurs is incorrect. sent10: the alvineness occurs. sent11: that the fudging orderliness happens is prevented by the non-lesserness. sent12: the spotting minefield triggers that the formula but not the weeding stunner occurs. sent13: not the operationalistness but the marbles happens. sent14: if that that the RF happens and the beating anomia happens is not wrong is incorrect then the inexpressibleness does not occur. sent15: if the fact that the lesserness happens and the getting occurs is incorrect the fudging orderliness does not occur. sent16: if the formula happens the ineffectiveness does not occur. sent17: that the altostratus does not occur and the aceticness happens results in that the permeableness happens.
sent15 & sent9 -> int1: the fudging orderliness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the nectariferousness happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fudging orderliness does not occur and the nectariferousness occurs.; sent5 & int2 -> int3: the ineffectiveness occurs.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the beating masturbator occurs.
$hypothesis$ = if the nectariferousness occurs the ineffectiveness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: not the beating anomia but the IW occurs. sent2: if the tracheostomy occurs that the hypophysectomy happens hold. sent3: the monotonicness does not occur. sent4: the belling occurs. sent5: the ineffectiveness happens if not the fudging orderliness but the nectariferousness happens. sent6: if the ineffectiveness does not occur either the fudging orderliness occurs or the nectariferousness occurs or both. sent7: the fact that the fudging rangeland happens is not wrong. sent8: the informalness occurs. sent9: the fact that the lesserness occurs and the getting occurs is incorrect. sent10: the alvineness occurs. sent11: that the fudging orderliness happens is prevented by the non-lesserness. sent12: the spotting minefield triggers that the formula but not the weeding stunner occurs. sent13: not the operationalistness but the marbles happens. sent14: if that that the RF happens and the beating anomia happens is not wrong is incorrect then the inexpressibleness does not occur. sent15: if the fact that the lesserness happens and the getting occurs is incorrect the fudging orderliness does not occur. sent16: if the formula happens the ineffectiveness does not occur. sent17: that the altostratus does not occur and the aceticness happens results in that the permeableness happens. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 & sent9 -> int1: the fudging orderliness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the nectariferousness happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fudging orderliness does not occur and the nectariferousness occurs.; sent5 & int2 -> int3: the ineffectiveness occurs.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__