the sighting occurs.
sent1: the anatropousness is prevented by that the bacillarness does not occur or the editorship happens or both. sent2: the anatropousness occurs if the fact that the airs occurs and the anatropousness does not occur does not hold. sent3: if the aptitudinalness does not occur then that both the airing and the non-anatropousness happens is false. sent4: if that the anatropousness and the sight happens is not true then the sight does not occur. sent5: the humanisticness occurs if the fact that the cruciferousness occurs and the humanisticness does not occur is incorrect. sent6: the aptitudinalness does not occur. sent7: if the robbery does not occur and the aptitudinalness does not occur the airing does not occur. sent8: that both the anatropousness and the sight happens is incorrect if the airs does not occur. sent9: either the bacillarness or the editorship or both happens. sent10: that the antagonism does not occur results in that the railroading occurs and the hunching occurs. sent11: either the bacillarness or the editorship or both occurs if the sight does not occur. sent12: the anatropousness does not occur if the bacillarness does not occur. sent13: the non-bacillarness and/or the editorship happens if the sighting does not occur. sent14: the robbery does not occur and the aptitudinalness does not occur if the railroading occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sight does not occur.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: either the non-bacillarness or the editorship or both occurs.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the anatropousness does not occur.; sent3 & sent6 -> int3: that the airing but not the anatropousness occurs is not true.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the anatropousness happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the sight does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the sighting occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the anatropousness is prevented by that the bacillarness does not occur or the editorship happens or both. sent2: the anatropousness occurs if the fact that the airs occurs and the anatropousness does not occur does not hold. sent3: if the aptitudinalness does not occur then that both the airing and the non-anatropousness happens is false. sent4: if that the anatropousness and the sight happens is not true then the sight does not occur. sent5: the humanisticness occurs if the fact that the cruciferousness occurs and the humanisticness does not occur is incorrect. sent6: the aptitudinalness does not occur. sent7: if the robbery does not occur and the aptitudinalness does not occur the airing does not occur. sent8: that both the anatropousness and the sight happens is incorrect if the airs does not occur. sent9: either the bacillarness or the editorship or both happens. sent10: that the antagonism does not occur results in that the railroading occurs and the hunching occurs. sent11: either the bacillarness or the editorship or both occurs if the sight does not occur. sent12: the anatropousness does not occur if the bacillarness does not occur. sent13: the non-bacillarness and/or the editorship happens if the sighting does not occur. sent14: the robbery does not occur and the aptitudinalness does not occur if the railroading occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sight does not occur.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: either the non-bacillarness or the editorship or both occurs.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the anatropousness does not occur.; sent3 & sent6 -> int3: that the airing but not the anatropousness occurs is not true.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the anatropousness happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__