the recurring does not occur.
sent1: the warming crooked is prevented by the carbonating chapterhouse. sent2: the involution and/or the carbonating chapterhouse leads to that the warming crooked does not occur. sent3: that the indenting happens is triggered by either that the topping does not occur or the non-crosswiseness or both. sent4: the drinking Seminole happens. sent5: the toppingness occurs or the crosswiseness does not occur or both. sent6: that the drinking Seminole does not occur and the Romansness does not occur leads to that the recurring does not occur. sent7: the drinking teg does not occur if the warming eliminator occurs and the nonconformist happens. sent8: if the topping and the Romansness occurs then the giveaway does not occur. sent9: the Romansness occurs if the drinking Seminole happens. sent10: the giveaway and the drinking stridor happens if that the warming crooked does not occur is true. sent11: that the warming crooked does not occur prevents that the drinking stridor does not occur. sent12: the involution happens and/or the carbonating chapterhouse occurs. sent13: the indent causes that the recurring occurs. sent14: the drinking stridor occurs.
sent9 & sent4 -> int1: the Romansness happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the topping occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the topping occurs and the Romans occurs.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the fact that the giveaway does not occur is true.; sent2 & sent12 -> int4: the warming crooked does not occur.; sent10 & int4 -> int5: both the giveaway and the drinking stridor occurs.; int5 -> int6: the giveaway occurs.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the topping does not occur.; int8 -> int9: the topping does not occur or the crosswiseness does not occur or both.; int9 & sent3 -> int10: the indent happens.; int10 & sent13 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the recurring does not occur hold.
$hypothesis$ = the recurring does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the warming crooked is prevented by the carbonating chapterhouse. sent2: the involution and/or the carbonating chapterhouse leads to that the warming crooked does not occur. sent3: that the indenting happens is triggered by either that the topping does not occur or the non-crosswiseness or both. sent4: the drinking Seminole happens. sent5: the toppingness occurs or the crosswiseness does not occur or both. sent6: that the drinking Seminole does not occur and the Romansness does not occur leads to that the recurring does not occur. sent7: the drinking teg does not occur if the warming eliminator occurs and the nonconformist happens. sent8: if the topping and the Romansness occurs then the giveaway does not occur. sent9: the Romansness occurs if the drinking Seminole happens. sent10: the giveaway and the drinking stridor happens if that the warming crooked does not occur is true. sent11: that the warming crooked does not occur prevents that the drinking stridor does not occur. sent12: the involution happens and/or the carbonating chapterhouse occurs. sent13: the indent causes that the recurring occurs. sent14: the drinking stridor occurs. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent4 -> int1: the Romansness happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the topping occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the topping occurs and the Romans occurs.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the fact that the giveaway does not occur is true.; sent2 & sent12 -> int4: the warming crooked does not occur.; sent10 & int4 -> int5: both the giveaway and the drinking stridor occurs.; int5 -> int6: the giveaway occurs.; int3 & int6 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the topping does not occur.; int8 -> int9: the topping does not occur or the crosswiseness does not occur or both.; int9 & sent3 -> int10: the indent happens.; int10 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__