the fact that the contracture does not occur and the crooking zarf does not occur does not hold.
sent1: the technology does not occur if that the ELISA happens and/or the countersubversion occurs is not true. sent2: if the technology does not occur then the fact that not the sit-in but the despoticness happens is false. sent3: if the creep does not occur and the directingness does not occur then the nodding honk happens. sent4: the technology occurs. sent5: the contracture is prevented by that the ruff occurs. sent6: the canceling bayberry occurs. sent7: if the fact that the canceling hunk happens and the canceling bayberry does not occur is false the crooking washtub does not occur. sent8: that the crooking washtub happens and the canceling bayberry occurs is wrong. sent9: the fact that the crooking sandglass happens is correct. sent10: the proposal does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the crooking washtub occurs but the canceling bayberry does not occur does not hold then the canceling hunk does not occur. sent12: the sit-in occurs if the fact that not the sit-in but the despoticness occurs is not right. sent13: the fact that the efficientness does not occur but the ruff happens is wrong if the sit-in occurs. sent14: if the efficientness occurs the fact that the canceling hunk happens and the canceling bayberry does not occur is incorrect. sent15: that the ruff does not occur is prevented by that the canceling hunk does not occur and the efficientness does not occur. sent16: that the sit-in does not occur leads to that the efficientness does not occur. sent17: the sit-in does not occur. sent18: that the crooking zarf does not occur and the technology occurs is correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the crooking washtub happens but the canceling bayberry does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: that the canceling bayberry does not occur hold.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the crooking washtub but not the canceling bayberry happens is false.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: the canceling hunk does not occur.; sent16 & sent17 -> int5: the efficientness does not occur.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the canceling hunk does not occur and the efficientness does not occur.; int6 & sent15 -> int7: the ruff happens.; int7 & sent5 -> int8: the contracture does not occur.; sent18 -> int9: the crooking zarf does not occur.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the contracture does not occur and the crooking zarf does not occur is not right.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the contracture does not occur and the crooking zarf does not occur does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the technology does not occur if that the ELISA happens and/or the countersubversion occurs is not true. sent2: if the technology does not occur then the fact that not the sit-in but the despoticness happens is false. sent3: if the creep does not occur and the directingness does not occur then the nodding honk happens. sent4: the technology occurs. sent5: the contracture is prevented by that the ruff occurs. sent6: the canceling bayberry occurs. sent7: if the fact that the canceling hunk happens and the canceling bayberry does not occur is false the crooking washtub does not occur. sent8: that the crooking washtub happens and the canceling bayberry occurs is wrong. sent9: the fact that the crooking sandglass happens is correct. sent10: the proposal does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the crooking washtub occurs but the canceling bayberry does not occur does not hold then the canceling hunk does not occur. sent12: the sit-in occurs if the fact that not the sit-in but the despoticness occurs is not right. sent13: the fact that the efficientness does not occur but the ruff happens is wrong if the sit-in occurs. sent14: if the efficientness occurs the fact that the canceling hunk happens and the canceling bayberry does not occur is incorrect. sent15: that the ruff does not occur is prevented by that the canceling hunk does not occur and the efficientness does not occur. sent16: that the sit-in does not occur leads to that the efficientness does not occur. sent17: the sit-in does not occur. sent18: that the crooking zarf does not occur and the technology occurs is correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the crooking washtub happens but the canceling bayberry does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: that the canceling bayberry does not occur hold.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the crooking washtub but not the canceling bayberry happens is false.; int3 & sent11 -> int4: the canceling hunk does not occur.; sent16 & sent17 -> int5: the efficientness does not occur.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the canceling hunk does not occur and the efficientness does not occur.; int6 & sent15 -> int7: the ruff happens.; int7 & sent5 -> int8: the contracture does not occur.; sent18 -> int9: the crooking zarf does not occur.; int8 & int9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__