that if the Sabineness does not occur the Methodistness does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur is incorrect.
sent1: that the Methodistness does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur is brought about by that the Sabineness occurs. sent2: that the respecting Polk happens and/or that the uncongenialness happens leads to that the sway does not occur. sent3: that both the non-Methodistness and the diving Tashkent occurs is triggered by the toroidalness. sent4: the Methodist does not occur if the uncongenialness does not occur. sent5: the Methodistness does not occur. sent6: if the fossilizing does not occur the paddling does not occur and the Afghaniness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the sway does not occur and the Sabineness happens does not hold if the toroidalness does not occur. sent8: that not the Methodist but the diving Tashkent occurs is triggered by the non-Sabineness. sent9: the fact that not the rendition but the branchialness occurs does not hold. sent10: if the toroidalness does not occur then the fact that the sway does not occur and the Sabineness does not occur is incorrect. sent11: the toroidalness does not occur. sent12: that not the powder but the appraisal happens is false. sent13: that not the respecting Polk but the uncongenialness occurs brings about that the spreading Viverridae occurs. sent14: if the Sabineness does not occur then the Methodist does not occur. sent15: that the uncovering happens is prevented by the pyroelectricity or that the self-induction occurs or both. sent16: if the uncongenialness does not occur then the Methodist does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur. sent17: if the respecting Polk happens then the sway does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the uncongenialness happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the respecting Polk or the uncongenialness or both happens.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the sway does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Sabine does not occur.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: the sway does not occur and the Sabine does not occur.; sent10 & sent11 -> int4: the fact that the sway does not occur and the Sabine does not occur is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the uncongenialness does not occur.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: the Methodist does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the spreading Viverridae happens.
$hypothesis$ = that if the Sabineness does not occur the Methodistness does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the Methodistness does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur is brought about by that the Sabineness occurs. sent2: that the respecting Polk happens and/or that the uncongenialness happens leads to that the sway does not occur. sent3: that both the non-Methodistness and the diving Tashkent occurs is triggered by the toroidalness. sent4: the Methodist does not occur if the uncongenialness does not occur. sent5: the Methodistness does not occur. sent6: if the fossilizing does not occur the paddling does not occur and the Afghaniness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the sway does not occur and the Sabineness happens does not hold if the toroidalness does not occur. sent8: that not the Methodist but the diving Tashkent occurs is triggered by the non-Sabineness. sent9: the fact that not the rendition but the branchialness occurs does not hold. sent10: if the toroidalness does not occur then the fact that the sway does not occur and the Sabineness does not occur is incorrect. sent11: the toroidalness does not occur. sent12: that not the powder but the appraisal happens is false. sent13: that not the respecting Polk but the uncongenialness occurs brings about that the spreading Viverridae occurs. sent14: if the Sabineness does not occur then the Methodist does not occur. sent15: that the uncovering happens is prevented by the pyroelectricity or that the self-induction occurs or both. sent16: if the uncongenialness does not occur then the Methodist does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur. sent17: if the respecting Polk happens then the sway does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the uncongenialness happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the respecting Polk or the uncongenialness or both happens.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the sway does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Sabine does not occur.; int2 & assump2 -> int3: the sway does not occur and the Sabine does not occur.; sent10 & sent11 -> int4: the fact that the sway does not occur and the Sabine does not occur is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the uncongenialness does not occur.; int6 & sent16 -> int7: the Methodist does not occur and the diving Tashkent does not occur.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__