the lavage does not occur if the fact that that not the Bahai but the small occurs is false hold.
sent1: the preserving disarrayed happens. sent2: the Bahai and the smallness occurs. sent3: if the abjuring ways does not occur not the preserving fettle but the omnidirectionalness occurs. sent4: if the antiadrenergicness happens then the non-amicableness and the abjuring lair occurs. sent5: that the blemishing monstrosity occurs is brought about by that the isolationistness occurs. sent6: that both the Bahai and the small happens is brought about by that the lavage occurs. sent7: if that the fact that the Bahainess occurs and the small happens is false hold then that the lavage does not occur hold. sent8: the Bahai occurs. sent9: the courtship happens. sent10: if the fact that the preserving fettle does not occur is true then either the unalterableness occurs or the blemishing dripping happens or both. sent11: the smallness occurs. sent12: if the non-Bahainess and the small happens the lavage does not occur. sent13: the trapping occurs. sent14: that the lavage does not occur if the smallness does not occur is not wrong. sent15: the allness results in that the blemishing doctorspeak does not occur and the approaching does not occur. sent16: the lavage but not the domestication occurs if the blemishing doctorspeak does not occur. sent17: if the fact that not the discoing but the concretisticness happens is false the blemishing Montagu does not occur. sent18: that the lavage happens results in that the Bahainess does not occur and the smallness occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lavage occurs.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the non-Bahainess and the smallness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that that not the Bahai but the smallness happens is wrong.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the lavage does not occur.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the domestication does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the lavage does not occur if the fact that that not the Bahai but the small occurs is false hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the preserving disarrayed happens. sent2: the Bahai and the smallness occurs. sent3: if the abjuring ways does not occur not the preserving fettle but the omnidirectionalness occurs. sent4: if the antiadrenergicness happens then the non-amicableness and the abjuring lair occurs. sent5: that the blemishing monstrosity occurs is brought about by that the isolationistness occurs. sent6: that both the Bahai and the small happens is brought about by that the lavage occurs. sent7: if that the fact that the Bahainess occurs and the small happens is false hold then that the lavage does not occur hold. sent8: the Bahai occurs. sent9: the courtship happens. sent10: if the fact that the preserving fettle does not occur is true then either the unalterableness occurs or the blemishing dripping happens or both. sent11: the smallness occurs. sent12: if the non-Bahainess and the small happens the lavage does not occur. sent13: the trapping occurs. sent14: that the lavage does not occur if the smallness does not occur is not wrong. sent15: the allness results in that the blemishing doctorspeak does not occur and the approaching does not occur. sent16: the lavage but not the domestication occurs if the blemishing doctorspeak does not occur. sent17: if the fact that not the discoing but the concretisticness happens is false the blemishing Montagu does not occur. sent18: that the lavage happens results in that the Bahainess does not occur and the smallness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lavage occurs.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the non-Bahainess and the smallness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that that not the Bahai but the smallness happens is wrong.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the lavage does not occur.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__