the concatenation does not occur and the roboticness does not occur.
sent1: that not the bobsledding but the democratization happens is brought about by that the peripatetic happens. sent2: the outrage occurs. sent3: if the peripateticness happens the concatenation does not occur. sent4: not the tankage but the wrestling rheumatism occurs. sent5: the grumbling hymn occurs. sent6: if the stinting Bubulcus occurs and/or the peripateticness happens then the concatenation does not occur. sent7: that the tankage does not occur but the outrage occurs prevents that the roboticness occurs. sent8: the fact that the preluding does not occur is not wrong if the stinting Bubulcus does not occur and the evaluating does not occur. sent9: if the democratization does not occur then the stinting Bubulcus occurs. sent10: the evaluating happens if the grumbling hymn occurs. sent11: the remand occurs. sent12: that the evaluating happens is prevented by the democratization.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the democratization occurs.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the evaluating does not occur hold.; sent10 & sent5 -> int2: the evaluating happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the democratization does not occur is correct.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the stinting Bubulcus happens.; int5 -> int6: the stinting Bubulcus and/or the peripateticness happens.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the concatenation does not occur.; sent4 -> int8: the tankage does not occur.; int8 & sent2 -> int9: the tankage does not occur and the outrage happens.; sent7 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the roboticness does not occur is correct.; int7 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the bobsledding does not occur and the prelude does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the concatenation does not occur and the roboticness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that not the bobsledding but the democratization happens is brought about by that the peripatetic happens. sent2: the outrage occurs. sent3: if the peripateticness happens the concatenation does not occur. sent4: not the tankage but the wrestling rheumatism occurs. sent5: the grumbling hymn occurs. sent6: if the stinting Bubulcus occurs and/or the peripateticness happens then the concatenation does not occur. sent7: that the tankage does not occur but the outrage occurs prevents that the roboticness occurs. sent8: the fact that the preluding does not occur is not wrong if the stinting Bubulcus does not occur and the evaluating does not occur. sent9: if the democratization does not occur then the stinting Bubulcus occurs. sent10: the evaluating happens if the grumbling hymn occurs. sent11: the remand occurs. sent12: that the evaluating happens is prevented by the democratization. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the democratization occurs.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the evaluating does not occur hold.; sent10 & sent5 -> int2: the evaluating happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the democratization does not occur is correct.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the stinting Bubulcus happens.; int5 -> int6: the stinting Bubulcus and/or the peripateticness happens.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the concatenation does not occur.; sent4 -> int8: the tankage does not occur.; int8 & sent2 -> int9: the tankage does not occur and the outrage happens.; sent7 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the roboticness does not occur is correct.; int7 & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__