the chancing replication and/or that the fattism occurs is caused by that the lung-likeness does not occur.
sent1: the exploding occurs. sent2: that the conceptualization occurs is not false if both the celebratoriness and the non-ununderstoodness happens. sent3: either the arthralgicness or the puncturelessness or both happens. sent4: that the fattism occurs is triggered by that the copout happens and the lung-likeness does not occur. sent5: the fact that the sugarlessness and/or the fortifying is not false is brought about by that the amplifying does not occur. sent6: the fact that the fattism happens is not incorrect if the copout and the lung-likeness occurs. sent7: the lung-likeness results in either that the chancing replication occurs or that the fattism happens or both. sent8: if the show does not occur that the larceny occurs and/or the Ruritanianness happens is not wrong. sent9: the chart does not occur. sent10: if the tortiousness happens then the fact that not the paging mercilessness but the chancing replication occurs is not true. sent11: if that the paging mercilessness does not occur and the chancing replication occurs is false then the chancing replication does not occur. sent12: the fact that the Transportation occurs hold. sent13: the copout occurs. sent14: the infallibleness but not the copout occurs if the fact that the lung-likeness happens hold. sent15: the sugarlessness happens if the depletion occurs but the assailing scramble does not occur. sent16: that the celebratoriness or the excrescentness or both is right is caused by the non-mentalness. sent17: the chancing retailing happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lung-likeness does not occur.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the copout occurs but the lung-likeness does not occur.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fattism occurs.; int2 -> int3: the chancing replication occurs and/or the fattism happens.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the wearing occurs and/or the infallibleness occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the chancing replication and/or that the fattism occurs is caused by that the lung-likeness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the exploding occurs. sent2: that the conceptualization occurs is not false if both the celebratoriness and the non-ununderstoodness happens. sent3: either the arthralgicness or the puncturelessness or both happens. sent4: that the fattism occurs is triggered by that the copout happens and the lung-likeness does not occur. sent5: the fact that the sugarlessness and/or the fortifying is not false is brought about by that the amplifying does not occur. sent6: the fact that the fattism happens is not incorrect if the copout and the lung-likeness occurs. sent7: the lung-likeness results in either that the chancing replication occurs or that the fattism happens or both. sent8: if the show does not occur that the larceny occurs and/or the Ruritanianness happens is not wrong. sent9: the chart does not occur. sent10: if the tortiousness happens then the fact that not the paging mercilessness but the chancing replication occurs is not true. sent11: if that the paging mercilessness does not occur and the chancing replication occurs is false then the chancing replication does not occur. sent12: the fact that the Transportation occurs hold. sent13: the copout occurs. sent14: the infallibleness but not the copout occurs if the fact that the lung-likeness happens hold. sent15: the sugarlessness happens if the depletion occurs but the assailing scramble does not occur. sent16: that the celebratoriness or the excrescentness or both is right is caused by the non-mentalness. sent17: the chancing retailing happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lung-likeness does not occur.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the copout occurs but the lung-likeness does not occur.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fattism occurs.; int2 -> int3: the chancing replication occurs and/or the fattism happens.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__