the rekindling cameo does not occur.
sent1: the cryogenicsness does not occur if that the alibiing cenotaph occurs and the littleness happens is not correct. sent2: both the straining shrub and the tragicness occurs. sent3: if the adduction does not occur then the fact that the alibiing cenotaph and the littleness occurs does not hold. sent4: if the temperance does not occur the chant occurs but the seizing does not occur. sent5: not the alibiing cenotaph but the littleness occurs. sent6: that the rekindling Hirschsprung happens is triggered by the tragicness. sent7: the rekindling bridgehead does not occur. sent8: if the alibiing cenotaph does not occur the commute and the non-cryogenicsness happens. sent9: the pioneering happens. sent10: that the straining shrub and the rekindling cameo happens prevents the commuting. sent11: the straining trophotropism occurs. sent12: the adduction does not occur.
sent2 -> int1: the straining shrub occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the rekindling cameo occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the straining shrub happens and the rekindling cameo occurs.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the commuting does not occur.; sent5 -> int4: the alibiing cenotaph does not occur.; sent8 & int4 -> int5: the commute but not the cryogenicsness happens.; int5 -> int6: the commute happens.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the straining fifties happens and the rekindling Hirschsprung happens.
sent3 & sent12 -> int8: the fact that the alibiing cenotaph and the littleness happens is not true.; sent1 & int8 -> int9: the cryogenicsness does not occur.;
$hypothesis$ = the rekindling cameo does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the cryogenicsness does not occur if that the alibiing cenotaph occurs and the littleness happens is not correct. sent2: both the straining shrub and the tragicness occurs. sent3: if the adduction does not occur then the fact that the alibiing cenotaph and the littleness occurs does not hold. sent4: if the temperance does not occur the chant occurs but the seizing does not occur. sent5: not the alibiing cenotaph but the littleness occurs. sent6: that the rekindling Hirschsprung happens is triggered by the tragicness. sent7: the rekindling bridgehead does not occur. sent8: if the alibiing cenotaph does not occur the commute and the non-cryogenicsness happens. sent9: the pioneering happens. sent10: that the straining shrub and the rekindling cameo happens prevents the commuting. sent11: the straining trophotropism occurs. sent12: the adduction does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the straining shrub occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the rekindling cameo occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the straining shrub happens and the rekindling cameo occurs.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the commuting does not occur.; sent5 -> int4: the alibiing cenotaph does not occur.; sent8 & int4 -> int5: the commute but not the cryogenicsness happens.; int5 -> int6: the commute happens.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__