that not the detraining hoot but the lustrum occurs if the true does not occur is false.
sent1: the bordering diastole happens. sent2: the bordering sciolism does not occur. sent3: that not the detraining hoot but the lustrum happens hold if the trueness occurs. sent4: the eyelessness happens. sent5: the wages happens. sent6: not the bordering tridymite but the outburst occurs. sent7: the choragicness does not occur. sent8: that that the truing happens and the bordering thiamine happens is not wrong is not correct. sent9: the corvee is triggered by that the schizoid happens but the foraging Sind does not occur. sent10: the basilicanness does not occur. sent11: the hungriness does not occur and the Ravel occurs. sent12: that the detraining denudation occurs causes that the photoemissiveness occurs. sent13: the fact that the truing does not occur but the bordering thiamine occurs does not hold. sent14: if the bordering fur-piece happens the heeling mispronunciation happens. sent15: the fact that the aggro occurs hold if the seminalness occurs. sent16: the detraining Uruguay occurs. sent17: the lustrum happens. sent18: the bordering thiamine occurs if the adroitness and the non-basilicanness happens. sent19: that the detraining hoot happens triggers the adroitness.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the detraining hoot happens.; sent19 & assump2 -> int1: the adroitness happens.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the adroitness but not the basilicanness occurs.; int2 & sent18 -> int3: the bordering thiamine happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the truing does not occur.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: not the true but the bordering thiamine happens.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the detraining hoot does not occur.; int6 & sent17 -> int7: not the detraining hoot but the lustrum happens.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that not the detraining hoot but the lustrum occurs if the true does not occur is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the bordering diastole happens. sent2: the bordering sciolism does not occur. sent3: that not the detraining hoot but the lustrum happens hold if the trueness occurs. sent4: the eyelessness happens. sent5: the wages happens. sent6: not the bordering tridymite but the outburst occurs. sent7: the choragicness does not occur. sent8: that that the truing happens and the bordering thiamine happens is not wrong is not correct. sent9: the corvee is triggered by that the schizoid happens but the foraging Sind does not occur. sent10: the basilicanness does not occur. sent11: the hungriness does not occur and the Ravel occurs. sent12: that the detraining denudation occurs causes that the photoemissiveness occurs. sent13: the fact that the truing does not occur but the bordering thiamine occurs does not hold. sent14: if the bordering fur-piece happens the heeling mispronunciation happens. sent15: the fact that the aggro occurs hold if the seminalness occurs. sent16: the detraining Uruguay occurs. sent17: the lustrum happens. sent18: the bordering thiamine occurs if the adroitness and the non-basilicanness happens. sent19: that the detraining hoot happens triggers the adroitness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the detraining hoot happens.; sent19 & assump2 -> int1: the adroitness happens.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the adroitness but not the basilicanness occurs.; int2 & sent18 -> int3: the bordering thiamine happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the truing does not occur.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: not the true but the bordering thiamine happens.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int5 -> int6: the detraining hoot does not occur.; int6 & sent17 -> int7: not the detraining hoot but the lustrum happens.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__