the acanthoticness leads to that not the transaction but the Kafkaesqueness happens.
sent1: that the pulverization happens is caused by that the starvation occurs. sent2: the Kafkaesqueness happens. sent3: if that the cancan does not occur but the discarding copperware happens is incorrect the shambles occurs. sent4: that the acanthoticness but not the shambles happens yields that the pyrecticness does not occur. sent5: the fact that not the cancan but the discarding copperware occurs is not right if the acanthoticness occurs. sent6: the fact that the cancan happens and the discarding copperware occurs is incorrect. sent7: if that the starvation does not occur and the stabilization occurs is false the starvation occurs. sent8: that not the transaction but the Kafkaesqueness occurs is caused by that the shambles occurs. sent9: that the Kafkaesqueness does not occur results in that the acanthoticness occurs and the shambles does not occur. sent10: the Circumcision occurs. sent11: not the cartage but the solanaceousness occurs. sent12: the acanthoticness triggers that both the transaction and the Kafkaesqueness happens. sent13: that the Kafkaesqueness but not the transaction occurs does not hold if the pulverization happens. sent14: if the fact that the solanaceousness occurs is not wrong then the hemicness happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the acanthoticness occurs hold.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: that the cancan does not occur but the discarding copperware happens is incorrect.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that the shambles occurs hold.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the transaction does not occur but the Kafkaesqueness happens.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the pyrecticness does not occur but the crenelation occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the acanthoticness leads to that not the transaction but the Kafkaesqueness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the pulverization happens is caused by that the starvation occurs. sent2: the Kafkaesqueness happens. sent3: if that the cancan does not occur but the discarding copperware happens is incorrect the shambles occurs. sent4: that the acanthoticness but not the shambles happens yields that the pyrecticness does not occur. sent5: the fact that not the cancan but the discarding copperware occurs is not right if the acanthoticness occurs. sent6: the fact that the cancan happens and the discarding copperware occurs is incorrect. sent7: if that the starvation does not occur and the stabilization occurs is false the starvation occurs. sent8: that not the transaction but the Kafkaesqueness occurs is caused by that the shambles occurs. sent9: that the Kafkaesqueness does not occur results in that the acanthoticness occurs and the shambles does not occur. sent10: the Circumcision occurs. sent11: not the cartage but the solanaceousness occurs. sent12: the acanthoticness triggers that both the transaction and the Kafkaesqueness happens. sent13: that the Kafkaesqueness but not the transaction occurs does not hold if the pulverization happens. sent14: if the fact that the solanaceousness occurs is not wrong then the hemicness happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the acanthoticness occurs hold.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: that the cancan does not occur but the discarding copperware happens is incorrect.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that the shambles occurs hold.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the transaction does not occur but the Kafkaesqueness happens.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__