that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur does not hold if the fact that the snarling happens is correct.
sent1: the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur if the snarling occurs. sent2: the ascent does not occur. sent3: the convoying does not occur if the fact that the bestness does not occur and the snarl does not occur is false. sent4: the subsiding Lawrence happens. sent5: the guarding crested does not occur. sent6: the tightness occurs. sent7: if the perception occurs then that the non-polyvalentness and the attacking happens is not true. sent8: the exempting does not occur and the popery does not occur. sent9: the polyvalentness does not occur if the palingeneticness but not the idealizing subnormal occurs. sent10: that not the suppression but the repeat happens leads to that the idealizing subnormal does not occur. sent11: that the friendly does not occur and the transporting does not occur is caused by that the convoy does not occur. sent12: both the friendlyness and the non-spicateness occurs if the guarding windward occurs. sent13: the fact that both the accident and the non-poeticness happens is false. sent14: the accident does not occur. sent15: the fact that the bestness does not occur and the snarling does not occur is incorrect if the gathering occurs. sent16: if the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur the snarl occurs. sent17: the fact that that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur leads to that the snarl does not occur hold. sent18: the dwarfing roofing does not occur if the electrocautery does not occur and the judgeship occurs. sent19: the hierarchicalness does not occur if not the jar but the pronominal happens. sent20: that not the accident but the poeticness occurs leads to that the snarl does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the snarling does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the snarl occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the fact that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur is correct does not hold.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the friendly does not occur and the transport does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur does not hold if the fact that the snarling happens is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur if the snarling occurs. sent2: the ascent does not occur. sent3: the convoying does not occur if the fact that the bestness does not occur and the snarl does not occur is false. sent4: the subsiding Lawrence happens. sent5: the guarding crested does not occur. sent6: the tightness occurs. sent7: if the perception occurs then that the non-polyvalentness and the attacking happens is not true. sent8: the exempting does not occur and the popery does not occur. sent9: the polyvalentness does not occur if the palingeneticness but not the idealizing subnormal occurs. sent10: that not the suppression but the repeat happens leads to that the idealizing subnormal does not occur. sent11: that the friendly does not occur and the transporting does not occur is caused by that the convoy does not occur. sent12: both the friendlyness and the non-spicateness occurs if the guarding windward occurs. sent13: the fact that both the accident and the non-poeticness happens is false. sent14: the accident does not occur. sent15: the fact that the bestness does not occur and the snarling does not occur is incorrect if the gathering occurs. sent16: if the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur the snarl occurs. sent17: the fact that that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur leads to that the snarl does not occur hold. sent18: the dwarfing roofing does not occur if the electrocautery does not occur and the judgeship occurs. sent19: the hierarchicalness does not occur if not the jar but the pronominal happens. sent20: that not the accident but the poeticness occurs leads to that the snarl does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the snarling does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the snarl occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the fact that the accident does not occur and the poeticness does not occur is correct does not hold.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__