that the disruption does not occur yields that the Balzacianness happens and the pigmenting malachite happens.
sent1: the goal-kick does not occur. sent2: if that the variableness does not occur and the pigmenting vitality does not occur is not true the Balzacianness happens. sent3: the Balzacianness occurs if the pigmenting vitality happens. sent4: that the pigmenting vitality does not occur results in that the reflux does not occur and/or the disruption does not occur. sent5: that the variable does not occur and the pigmenting vitality does not occur is not correct if the reflux does not occur. sent6: the fictionalization and the Tyrolean happens. sent7: the illegalness occurs if the stall occurs. sent8: that the jointing happens is caused by that the reflux does not occur and/or that the disruption does not occur. sent9: if the stimulativeness happens then the untidiness occurs. sent10: the disruption occurs if the reflux occurs. sent11: if the exhaustibleness does not occur then the illegalness does not occur and the stalling does not occur. sent12: the pigmenting malachite occurs if the fact that the illegalness occurs is true. sent13: the exhaustibleness does not occur if the idiomaticness does not occur and the omission does not occur. sent14: the conforming does not occur. sent15: the exhaustibleness occurs.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the reflux occurs.; sent10 & assump2 -> int1: the disruption occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the disruption does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the reflux does not occur is not wrong.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the fact that the variable does not occur and the pigmenting vitality does not occur is not correct is not incorrect.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the Balzacianness happens.;
the fact that the jointed happens hold.
$hypothesis$ = that the disruption does not occur yields that the Balzacianness happens and the pigmenting malachite happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the goal-kick does not occur. sent2: if that the variableness does not occur and the pigmenting vitality does not occur is not true the Balzacianness happens. sent3: the Balzacianness occurs if the pigmenting vitality happens. sent4: that the pigmenting vitality does not occur results in that the reflux does not occur and/or the disruption does not occur. sent5: that the variable does not occur and the pigmenting vitality does not occur is not correct if the reflux does not occur. sent6: the fictionalization and the Tyrolean happens. sent7: the illegalness occurs if the stall occurs. sent8: that the jointing happens is caused by that the reflux does not occur and/or that the disruption does not occur. sent9: if the stimulativeness happens then the untidiness occurs. sent10: the disruption occurs if the reflux occurs. sent11: if the exhaustibleness does not occur then the illegalness does not occur and the stalling does not occur. sent12: the pigmenting malachite occurs if the fact that the illegalness occurs is true. sent13: the exhaustibleness does not occur if the idiomaticness does not occur and the omission does not occur. sent14: the conforming does not occur. sent15: the exhaustibleness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the reflux occurs.; sent10 & assump2 -> int1: the disruption occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the disruption does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the reflux does not occur is not wrong.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the fact that the variable does not occur and the pigmenting vitality does not occur is not correct is not incorrect.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the Balzacianness happens.; __UNKNOWN__