that both the non-acapnicness and the non-subsonicness happens is wrong.
sent1: the subsonicness does not occur if the fact that the subsonicness and the rhetoricalness happens is not correct. sent2: the wrongness happens. sent3: the overawing glassmaker does not occur and the toughness does not occur if the slapping does not occur. sent4: the wrong is prevented by that the acapnicness occurs and the acinarness occurs. sent5: the aberrating does not occur. sent6: that the gauging phlogopite and the presentationalness happens is caused by that the gauging one-off does not occur. sent7: if the acinarness does not occur the fact that both the non-acapnicness and the non-subsonicness occurs is false. sent8: that both the non-wrongness and the non-unrhetoricalness happens is caused by the gauging phlogopite. sent9: if the non-wrongness and the non-unrhetoricalness occurs then the acinarness does not occur. sent10: not the gauging one-off but the pullback happens if the overawing glassmaker does not occur. sent11: the acinarness happens. sent12: that the subsonicness but not the unrhetoricalness occurs does not hold. sent13: that the slap does not occur is not incorrect if the overhandness does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the acapnicness occurs.; assump1 & sent11 -> int1: the acapnicness happens and the acinarness happens.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the wronging does not occur.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the acapnicness does not occur.; sent1 & sent12 -> int5: the subsonicness does not occur.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
that the non-acapnicness and the non-subsonicness occurs is not correct.
$hypothesis$ = that both the non-acapnicness and the non-subsonicness happens is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the subsonicness does not occur if the fact that the subsonicness and the rhetoricalness happens is not correct. sent2: the wrongness happens. sent3: the overawing glassmaker does not occur and the toughness does not occur if the slapping does not occur. sent4: the wrong is prevented by that the acapnicness occurs and the acinarness occurs. sent5: the aberrating does not occur. sent6: that the gauging phlogopite and the presentationalness happens is caused by that the gauging one-off does not occur. sent7: if the acinarness does not occur the fact that both the non-acapnicness and the non-subsonicness occurs is false. sent8: that both the non-wrongness and the non-unrhetoricalness happens is caused by the gauging phlogopite. sent9: if the non-wrongness and the non-unrhetoricalness occurs then the acinarness does not occur. sent10: not the gauging one-off but the pullback happens if the overawing glassmaker does not occur. sent11: the acinarness happens. sent12: that the subsonicness but not the unrhetoricalness occurs does not hold. sent13: that the slap does not occur is not incorrect if the overhandness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the acapnicness occurs.; assump1 & sent11 -> int1: the acapnicness happens and the acinarness happens.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the wronging does not occur.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the acapnicness does not occur.; sent1 & sent12 -> int5: the subsonicness does not occur.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__