that the thespianness does not occur and the dissenting gentian does not occur is triggered by that the throw-in does not occur.
sent1: either that the systematicness happens or the processing dhak or both brings about that the guaranteeing divorced does not occur. sent2: the paniculateness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the paniculateness does not occur is correct that the specification but not the overhead occurs is not true. sent4: if the fact that the specification and the non-overheadness occurs is wrong the dissenting gentian does not occur. sent5: that the guaranteeing panic occurs hold. sent6: the guaranteeing Delichon does not occur and the guaranteeing ylem does not occur if the basilicanness happens. sent7: if the assisting occurs the thespianness does not occur. sent8: the processing boarder does not occur and the arrogating inaccuracy does not occur. sent9: the disobedience does not occur and the unequalness does not occur if the apocalypticness does not occur. sent10: the assist happens if the systematicness does not occur and the throw-in does not occur. sent11: if the guaranteeing ylem occurs then the opportuneness does not occur and the croquet does not occur. sent12: the Ephesiansness does not occur and the arrogating inaccuracy does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the systematicness happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the systematicness happens or the processing dhak happens or both.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the guaranteeing divorced does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the throw-in does not occur.; sent3 & sent2 -> int3: the fact that the fact that the fact that the specification happens but the overhead does not occur is not false is not right hold.; sent4 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the dissenting gentian does not occur is not incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = that the thespianness does not occur and the dissenting gentian does not occur is triggered by that the throw-in does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: either that the systematicness happens or the processing dhak or both brings about that the guaranteeing divorced does not occur. sent2: the paniculateness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the paniculateness does not occur is correct that the specification but not the overhead occurs is not true. sent4: if the fact that the specification and the non-overheadness occurs is wrong the dissenting gentian does not occur. sent5: that the guaranteeing panic occurs hold. sent6: the guaranteeing Delichon does not occur and the guaranteeing ylem does not occur if the basilicanness happens. sent7: if the assisting occurs the thespianness does not occur. sent8: the processing boarder does not occur and the arrogating inaccuracy does not occur. sent9: the disobedience does not occur and the unequalness does not occur if the apocalypticness does not occur. sent10: the assist happens if the systematicness does not occur and the throw-in does not occur. sent11: if the guaranteeing ylem occurs then the opportuneness does not occur and the croquet does not occur. sent12: the Ephesiansness does not occur and the arrogating inaccuracy does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the systematicness happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the systematicness happens or the processing dhak happens or both.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the guaranteeing divorced does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the throw-in does not occur.; sent3 & sent2 -> int3: the fact that the fact that the fact that the specification happens but the overhead does not occur is not false is not right hold.; sent4 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the dissenting gentian does not occur is not incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__