if the ropiness does not occur the fact that the provocation happens but the stocking does not occur is not right.
sent1: the testing happens. sent2: the fact that the provocation occurs and the stocking occurs is wrong if the Monophysite does not occur. sent3: the fact that the unthematicness does not occur is not false. sent4: if the Monophysiteness does not occur then the provocation happens but the stocking does not occur. sent5: that the provocation and the stocking happens is not true. sent6: if the ropiness occurs the fact that the provocation occurs but the stocking does not occur is not true. sent7: that the provocation but not the stocking occurs is brought about by that the ropiness does not occur. sent8: both the lettering putrefaction and the disarming occurs if the renovation does not occur. sent9: if the unthematicness does not occur the test happens. sent10: that both the provocation and the stocking occurs is not right if the ropiness does not occur. sent11: that the envy does not occur is brought about by that the non-wettingness and the ropiness occurs. sent12: the transaminating immotility does not occur. sent13: the fact that the provocation but not the stocking occurs is false if the Monophysiteness does not occur. sent14: if both the transaminating GIGO and the non-wettingness occurs the Monophysite does not occur. sent15: if that both the wettingness and the non-ropyness happens is not correct the arenaceousness does not occur. sent16: the wettingness prevents the non-ropyness.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wettingness happens.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the ropiness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the ropiness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the wetting does not occur.;
that the envy does not occur hold.
$hypothesis$ = if the ropiness does not occur the fact that the provocation happens but the stocking does not occur is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the testing happens. sent2: the fact that the provocation occurs and the stocking occurs is wrong if the Monophysite does not occur. sent3: the fact that the unthematicness does not occur is not false. sent4: if the Monophysiteness does not occur then the provocation happens but the stocking does not occur. sent5: that the provocation and the stocking happens is not true. sent6: if the ropiness occurs the fact that the provocation occurs but the stocking does not occur is not true. sent7: that the provocation but not the stocking occurs is brought about by that the ropiness does not occur. sent8: both the lettering putrefaction and the disarming occurs if the renovation does not occur. sent9: if the unthematicness does not occur the test happens. sent10: that both the provocation and the stocking occurs is not right if the ropiness does not occur. sent11: that the envy does not occur is brought about by that the non-wettingness and the ropiness occurs. sent12: the transaminating immotility does not occur. sent13: the fact that the provocation but not the stocking occurs is false if the Monophysiteness does not occur. sent14: if both the transaminating GIGO and the non-wettingness occurs the Monophysite does not occur. sent15: if that both the wettingness and the non-ropyness happens is not correct the arenaceousness does not occur. sent16: the wettingness prevents the non-ropyness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wettingness happens.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the ropiness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the ropiness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the wetting does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__