the blazing occurs.
sent1: if that the blaze occurs is correct then the atheisticness occurs. sent2: both the managership and the non-ambassadorialness occurs. sent3: that both the tracklessness and the ambassadorialness happens is triggered by that the managership does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the neuroplasty occurs and the corroding does not occur is not wrong then the fact that the managership does not occur is not wrong. sent5: that the overkill occurs is prevented by that the collaring Twin happens. sent6: the managership happens. sent7: the fact that the tracklessness occurs is right. sent8: that either the atheisticness occurs or the collaring Twin occurs or both prevents that the overkill occurs. sent9: the tracklessness happens if the ambassadorialness does not occur. sent10: that the ambassadorialness does not occur leads to that the overkill happens and the tracklessness happens. sent11: if the tracklessness does not occur and the overkill does not occur the collaring Twin does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blazing happens.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the atheisticness happens.; int1 -> int2: the atheisticness happens or the collaring Twin occurs or both.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the overkill does not occur.; sent2 -> int4: the ambassadorialness does not occur.; sent10 & int4 -> int5: the overkill and the tracklessness happens.; int5 -> int6: the overkill happens.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the blazing occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the blazing occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the blaze occurs is correct then the atheisticness occurs. sent2: both the managership and the non-ambassadorialness occurs. sent3: that both the tracklessness and the ambassadorialness happens is triggered by that the managership does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the neuroplasty occurs and the corroding does not occur is not wrong then the fact that the managership does not occur is not wrong. sent5: that the overkill occurs is prevented by that the collaring Twin happens. sent6: the managership happens. sent7: the fact that the tracklessness occurs is right. sent8: that either the atheisticness occurs or the collaring Twin occurs or both prevents that the overkill occurs. sent9: the tracklessness happens if the ambassadorialness does not occur. sent10: that the ambassadorialness does not occur leads to that the overkill happens and the tracklessness happens. sent11: if the tracklessness does not occur and the overkill does not occur the collaring Twin does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blazing happens.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the atheisticness happens.; int1 -> int2: the atheisticness happens or the collaring Twin occurs or both.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the overkill does not occur.; sent2 -> int4: the ambassadorialness does not occur.; sent10 & int4 -> int5: the overkill and the tracklessness happens.; int5 -> int6: the overkill happens.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__