the moving microprocessor occurs.
sent1: the troll happens. sent2: the branchiopodness does not occur and the impairing occurs if the snow happens. sent3: if that the fact that the carelessness and the screamer occurs is correct is not true the carelessness does not occur. sent4: the irresponsibleness occurs. sent5: the moving microprocessor does not occur if both the non-araneidalness and the carelessness happens. sent6: that the putout does not occur but the motorcade happens prevents that the araneidalness happens. sent7: if the fact that the putout does not occur but the motorcade occurs does not hold then the sciaticness happens. sent8: the putout does not occur. sent9: the carelessness happens if the fact that not the screamer but the branchiopodness occurs does not hold. sent10: the fact that the screamer does not occur and the branchiopod happens is wrong. sent11: if the carelessness does not occur then that the checker and the araneidalness happens is false. sent12: if the branchiopod does not occur that the carelessness happens and the screamer occurs is not correct. sent13: the checkering occurs. sent14: the canonicness happens. sent15: that the checker happens is prevented by that the sciaticness or the stiff or both occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that not the putout but the motorcade occurs is false.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the sciaticness happens.; int1 -> int2: the sciaticness or the stiff or both occurs.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the fact that the checker does not occur is not incorrect.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the putout does not occur and the motorcade occurs.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the araneidalness does not occur.; sent9 & sent10 -> int7: that the carelessness occurs hold.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the non-araneidalness and the carelessness happens.; int8 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the moving microprocessor happens.
$hypothesis$ = the moving microprocessor occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the troll happens. sent2: the branchiopodness does not occur and the impairing occurs if the snow happens. sent3: if that the fact that the carelessness and the screamer occurs is correct is not true the carelessness does not occur. sent4: the irresponsibleness occurs. sent5: the moving microprocessor does not occur if both the non-araneidalness and the carelessness happens. sent6: that the putout does not occur but the motorcade happens prevents that the araneidalness happens. sent7: if the fact that the putout does not occur but the motorcade occurs does not hold then the sciaticness happens. sent8: the putout does not occur. sent9: the carelessness happens if the fact that not the screamer but the branchiopodness occurs does not hold. sent10: the fact that the screamer does not occur and the branchiopod happens is wrong. sent11: if the carelessness does not occur then that the checker and the araneidalness happens is false. sent12: if the branchiopod does not occur that the carelessness happens and the screamer occurs is not correct. sent13: the checkering occurs. sent14: the canonicness happens. sent15: that the checker happens is prevented by that the sciaticness or the stiff or both occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that not the putout but the motorcade occurs is false.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the sciaticness happens.; int1 -> int2: the sciaticness or the stiff or both occurs.; int2 & sent15 -> int3: the fact that the checker does not occur is not incorrect.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the putout does not occur and the motorcade occurs.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the araneidalness does not occur.; sent9 & sent10 -> int7: that the carelessness occurs hold.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the non-araneidalness and the carelessness happens.; int8 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__