that that the cambialness happens is brought about by that the autoeciousness happens does not hold.
sent1: that the tuning happens is triggered by that the hydricness does not occur. sent2: the identifying markup occurs. sent3: that the calculating happens is brought about by that the tetravalentness does not occur. sent4: the fact that the Doomsday but not the tuning happens is not true. sent5: the boustrophedonicness happens. sent6: if both the Maundy and the non-splashyness happens then that the autoeciousness occurs is true. sent7: the cambialness happens if that the Maundy occurs and the splashiness does not occur does not hold. sent8: the snub occurs. sent9: that the mooning does not occur is triggered by that both the wearing giggle and the non-onshoreness occurs. sent10: the fact that the porcineness happens but the boustrophedonicness does not occur does not hold. sent11: that both the ballooning and the non-Washingtonianness happens is not right. sent12: that the fungalness happens causes the analogousness. sent13: the wearing preceptor does not occur. sent14: that the identifying gavel occurs but the wearing emcee does not occur hold. sent15: the identifying giantism occurs if the long-distanceness happens. sent16: if the combinativeness occurs but the search does not occur then the onshoreness occurs. sent17: the wearing serval occurs. sent18: the rabbetting flyspeck occurs if the identifying Musca does not occur. sent19: the cyberneticsness occurs. sent20: if the fact that the astringing stable and the non-zygoticness happens is false the pyrogallicness occurs. sent21: the autoeciousness does not occur if the Maundy and the non-splashyness occurs. sent22: that the fact that the identifying parlance occurs and the identifying chronicler does not occur is correct is incorrect.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the autoeciousness occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Maundy and the non-splashyness happens.; sent21 & assump2 -> int1: the autoeciousness does not occur.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the Maundy happens but the splashiness does not occur is false.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: the cambialness occurs.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that that the cambialness happens is brought about by that the autoeciousness happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the tuning happens is triggered by that the hydricness does not occur. sent2: the identifying markup occurs. sent3: that the calculating happens is brought about by that the tetravalentness does not occur. sent4: the fact that the Doomsday but not the tuning happens is not true. sent5: the boustrophedonicness happens. sent6: if both the Maundy and the non-splashyness happens then that the autoeciousness occurs is true. sent7: the cambialness happens if that the Maundy occurs and the splashiness does not occur does not hold. sent8: the snub occurs. sent9: that the mooning does not occur is triggered by that both the wearing giggle and the non-onshoreness occurs. sent10: the fact that the porcineness happens but the boustrophedonicness does not occur does not hold. sent11: that both the ballooning and the non-Washingtonianness happens is not right. sent12: that the fungalness happens causes the analogousness. sent13: the wearing preceptor does not occur. sent14: that the identifying gavel occurs but the wearing emcee does not occur hold. sent15: the identifying giantism occurs if the long-distanceness happens. sent16: if the combinativeness occurs but the search does not occur then the onshoreness occurs. sent17: the wearing serval occurs. sent18: the rabbetting flyspeck occurs if the identifying Musca does not occur. sent19: the cyberneticsness occurs. sent20: if the fact that the astringing stable and the non-zygoticness happens is false the pyrogallicness occurs. sent21: the autoeciousness does not occur if the Maundy and the non-splashyness occurs. sent22: that the fact that the identifying parlance occurs and the identifying chronicler does not occur is correct is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the autoeciousness occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Maundy and the non-splashyness happens.; sent21 & assump2 -> int1: the autoeciousness does not occur.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the Maundy happens but the splashiness does not occur is false.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: the cambialness occurs.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__