the propulsion does not occur.
sent1: if the barring forcemeat happens then the fact that the coma and the non-intelligibleness occurs is false. sent2: if the numerating lament does not occur the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur. sent3: both the barring dihybrid and the barring forcemeat occurs. sent4: the lying happens if that not the barring animism but the unionization occurs is not right. sent5: the unionization occurs. sent6: if the barring forcemeat happens the fact that the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness happens is false. sent7: the breakableness happens. sent8: if the barring forcemeat happens then that the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur is not right. sent9: that the barring animism does not occur but the unionization happens causes that the numerating lament does not occur. sent10: that the lying occurs triggers the propulsion.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the barring animism but the unionization happens.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the numerating lament does not occur.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur.; sent3 -> int3: the barring forcemeat occurs.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the barring animism does not occur and the unionization occurs is not true.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the lying occurs.; int7 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the propulsion does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the barring forcemeat happens then the fact that the coma and the non-intelligibleness occurs is false. sent2: if the numerating lament does not occur the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur. sent3: both the barring dihybrid and the barring forcemeat occurs. sent4: the lying happens if that not the barring animism but the unionization occurs is not right. sent5: the unionization occurs. sent6: if the barring forcemeat happens the fact that the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness happens is false. sent7: the breakableness happens. sent8: if the barring forcemeat happens then that the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur is not right. sent9: that the barring animism does not occur but the unionization happens causes that the numerating lament does not occur. sent10: that the lying occurs triggers the propulsion. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the barring animism but the unionization happens.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the numerating lament does not occur.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur.; sent3 -> int3: the barring forcemeat occurs.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the coma does not occur and the intelligibleness does not occur does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the barring animism does not occur and the unionization occurs is not true.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the lying occurs.; int7 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__