the scudding happens.
sent1: that the tremolo and the waterspout happens is triggered by that the freckling Laocoon does not occur. sent2: if the cheliferousness does not occur then that the soak occurs and the progestationalness does not occur is not right. sent3: the scud happens if the soak does not occur. sent4: that the enolicness does not occur is correct if that the unsensationalness and the farting Alaudidae happens is false. sent5: the cheliferousness does not occur. sent6: that both the unsensationalness and the farting Alaudidae occurs is incorrect if the ethnocentricness does not occur. sent7: that the nonindulgentness does not occur and the snuff does not occur prevents that the skittling does not occur. sent8: if the skittling occurs the despite occurs. sent9: if the enolicness does not occur the nonindulgentness does not occur and the snuffing does not occur. sent10: the fact that the soaking and the non-cheliferousness occurs is not correct if the tremolo happens. sent11: that the con does not occur brings about the non-progestationalness. sent12: the Constitution does not occur and the con does not occur. sent13: if the punishment happens the offingness does not occur and the ethnocentricness does not occur. sent14: the Constitution does not occur. sent15: if the con does not occur and the Constitution occurs the scudding does not occur. sent16: that the despite occurs leads to that not the freckling Laocoon but the vitiation happens.
sent12 -> int1: the con does not occur.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: that the progestationalness does not occur hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the soak happens is correct.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: both the soaking and the non-progestationalness occurs.; sent2 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the soak but not the progestationalness happens does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the soaking does not occur.; int6 & sent3 -> hypothesis;
the scud does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the scudding happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the tremolo and the waterspout happens is triggered by that the freckling Laocoon does not occur. sent2: if the cheliferousness does not occur then that the soak occurs and the progestationalness does not occur is not right. sent3: the scud happens if the soak does not occur. sent4: that the enolicness does not occur is correct if that the unsensationalness and the farting Alaudidae happens is false. sent5: the cheliferousness does not occur. sent6: that both the unsensationalness and the farting Alaudidae occurs is incorrect if the ethnocentricness does not occur. sent7: that the nonindulgentness does not occur and the snuff does not occur prevents that the skittling does not occur. sent8: if the skittling occurs the despite occurs. sent9: if the enolicness does not occur the nonindulgentness does not occur and the snuffing does not occur. sent10: the fact that the soaking and the non-cheliferousness occurs is not correct if the tremolo happens. sent11: that the con does not occur brings about the non-progestationalness. sent12: the Constitution does not occur and the con does not occur. sent13: if the punishment happens the offingness does not occur and the ethnocentricness does not occur. sent14: the Constitution does not occur. sent15: if the con does not occur and the Constitution occurs the scudding does not occur. sent16: that the despite occurs leads to that not the freckling Laocoon but the vitiation happens. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: the con does not occur.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: that the progestationalness does not occur hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the soak happens is correct.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: both the soaking and the non-progestationalness occurs.; sent2 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the soak but not the progestationalness happens does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the soaking does not occur.; int6 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__