the absorbentness results in that both the skimming Jackson and the Nigerian happens.
sent1: that the LASIK happens is not false if the cyclonicness does not occur. sent2: the reining does not occur. sent3: both the skimming Jackson and the Nigerian happens if the nonabsorbentness happens. sent4: the fact that both the seeming and the thoracotomy occurs is not right. sent5: that the deducing mugshot does not occur is brought about by that the consummation occurs. sent6: the nonabsorbentness occurs if the reining happens. sent7: the deducing nadolol does not occur and the offense does not occur if the skimming clinch happens. sent8: the deducing mugshot does not occur. sent9: that the reining and the skimming Jackson occurs is incorrect. sent10: if the fact that the rein does not occur but the skimming Jackson happens does not hold then the nonabsorbentness happens. sent11: if the consummation happens then the deducing mugshot does not occur and the cyclonicness does not occur. sent12: that the LASIK does not occur does not hold. sent13: if the absorbentness and the Nigerian happens then the unbarring rainbow does not occur. sent14: the consummation occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the reining does not occur and the skimming Jackson happens is false.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the nonabsorbentness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the nonabsorbentness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the reining does not occur and the skimming Jackson occurs.; int3 -> int4: the skimming Jackson happens.; sent11 & sent14 -> int5: the deducing mugshot does not occur and the cyclonicness does not occur.; int5 -> int6: the cyclonicness does not occur.;
the unbarring rainbow does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the absorbentness results in that both the skimming Jackson and the Nigerian happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the LASIK happens is not false if the cyclonicness does not occur. sent2: the reining does not occur. sent3: both the skimming Jackson and the Nigerian happens if the nonabsorbentness happens. sent4: the fact that both the seeming and the thoracotomy occurs is not right. sent5: that the deducing mugshot does not occur is brought about by that the consummation occurs. sent6: the nonabsorbentness occurs if the reining happens. sent7: the deducing nadolol does not occur and the offense does not occur if the skimming clinch happens. sent8: the deducing mugshot does not occur. sent9: that the reining and the skimming Jackson occurs is incorrect. sent10: if the fact that the rein does not occur but the skimming Jackson happens does not hold then the nonabsorbentness happens. sent11: if the consummation happens then the deducing mugshot does not occur and the cyclonicness does not occur. sent12: that the LASIK does not occur does not hold. sent13: if the absorbentness and the Nigerian happens then the unbarring rainbow does not occur. sent14: the consummation occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the reining does not occur and the skimming Jackson happens is false.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the nonabsorbentness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the nonabsorbentness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the reining does not occur and the skimming Jackson occurs.; int3 -> int4: the skimming Jackson happens.; sent11 & sent14 -> int5: the deducing mugshot does not occur and the cyclonicness does not occur.; int5 -> int6: the cyclonicness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__