the unthematicness occurs.
sent1: that the exsiccating pistol does not occur results in that the rapping Zephaniah and the exsiccating muton happens. sent2: the obligationalness occurs and the closeting happens if the fact that the effleurage occurs is not correct. sent3: that the closet does not occur but the cryptogamicness occurs is not true if the obligationalness does not occur. sent4: the obligationalness occurs if the effleurage does not occur. sent5: the tracheostomy and/or the sacrifice occurs if the cryptogamicness does not occur. sent6: not the exsiccating rational but the migration happens. sent7: the carbonyl occurs but the effleurage does not occur. sent8: the obligationalness occurs. sent9: the exsiccating polished occurs but the establishment does not occur. sent10: that the tracheostomy and the cryptogamicness occurs leads to the thematicness. sent11: the brunet does not occur. sent12: the symbolatry does not occur. sent13: that the cryptogamicness does not occur is prevented by the closeting. sent14: the sacrifice occurs if the exsiccating rational does not occur but the migration occurs. sent15: if the symbolatry does not occur then that the sacrifice happens but the tracheostomy does not occur is not correct.
sent14 & sent6 -> int1: the sacrifice occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tracheostomy does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the sacrificing occurs and the tracheostomy does not occur.; sent15 & sent12 -> int3: the fact that the sacrifice occurs and the tracheostomy does not occur is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the tracheostomy occurs.; sent7 -> int6: the effleurage does not occur.; sent2 & int6 -> int7: both the obligationalness and the closet happens.; int7 -> int8: the closeting happens.; sent13 & int8 -> int9: the cryptogamicness happens.; int5 & int9 -> int10: both the tracheostomy and the cryptogamicness occurs.; int10 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
the unthematicness occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the unthematicness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the exsiccating pistol does not occur results in that the rapping Zephaniah and the exsiccating muton happens. sent2: the obligationalness occurs and the closeting happens if the fact that the effleurage occurs is not correct. sent3: that the closet does not occur but the cryptogamicness occurs is not true if the obligationalness does not occur. sent4: the obligationalness occurs if the effleurage does not occur. sent5: the tracheostomy and/or the sacrifice occurs if the cryptogamicness does not occur. sent6: not the exsiccating rational but the migration happens. sent7: the carbonyl occurs but the effleurage does not occur. sent8: the obligationalness occurs. sent9: the exsiccating polished occurs but the establishment does not occur. sent10: that the tracheostomy and the cryptogamicness occurs leads to the thematicness. sent11: the brunet does not occur. sent12: the symbolatry does not occur. sent13: that the cryptogamicness does not occur is prevented by the closeting. sent14: the sacrifice occurs if the exsiccating rational does not occur but the migration occurs. sent15: if the symbolatry does not occur then that the sacrifice happens but the tracheostomy does not occur is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 & sent6 -> int1: the sacrifice occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tracheostomy does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the sacrificing occurs and the tracheostomy does not occur.; sent15 & sent12 -> int3: the fact that the sacrifice occurs and the tracheostomy does not occur is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the tracheostomy occurs.; sent7 -> int6: the effleurage does not occur.; sent2 & int6 -> int7: both the obligationalness and the closet happens.; int7 -> int8: the closeting happens.; sent13 & int8 -> int9: the cryptogamicness happens.; int5 & int9 -> int10: both the tracheostomy and the cryptogamicness occurs.; int10 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__