the irruption does not occur but the Estonianness happens.
sent1: the escalating does not occur and the belemniticness happens. sent2: the unsensationalness occurs. sent3: the crosswiseness happens if the responsibleness happens. sent4: the jitterbuging does not occur. sent5: that the Pharaonicness does not occur and the nagging Goethe happens is brought about by that the crosswiseness happens. sent6: that the chain-smoking occurs is prevented by that both the non-Pharaonicness and the nagging Goethe happens. sent7: the esophagealness does not occur but the recirculation happens. sent8: the disconnection does not occur. sent9: that the onness does not occur and the supersedure occurs is not wrong if the plopping happens. sent10: the fact that the chain-smoking happens is not incorrect. sent11: the Estonian happens. sent12: that not the irruption but the Estonian happens is wrong if the disconnection happens. sent13: the unperceptiveness happens. sent14: that not the disconnection but the irruption occurs brings about the responsibleness.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the irruption occurs.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the disconnection does not occur and the irruption happens.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the responsibleness occurs.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the crosswiseness occurs.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the Pharaonicness does not occur but the nagging Goethe happens.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: that the chain-smoking does not occur is right.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the irruption does not occur.; int7 & sent11 -> hypothesis;
that the irruption does not occur and the Estonianness happens is not true.
$hypothesis$ = the irruption does not occur but the Estonianness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the escalating does not occur and the belemniticness happens. sent2: the unsensationalness occurs. sent3: the crosswiseness happens if the responsibleness happens. sent4: the jitterbuging does not occur. sent5: that the Pharaonicness does not occur and the nagging Goethe happens is brought about by that the crosswiseness happens. sent6: that the chain-smoking occurs is prevented by that both the non-Pharaonicness and the nagging Goethe happens. sent7: the esophagealness does not occur but the recirculation happens. sent8: the disconnection does not occur. sent9: that the onness does not occur and the supersedure occurs is not wrong if the plopping happens. sent10: the fact that the chain-smoking happens is not incorrect. sent11: the Estonian happens. sent12: that not the irruption but the Estonian happens is wrong if the disconnection happens. sent13: the unperceptiveness happens. sent14: that not the disconnection but the irruption occurs brings about the responsibleness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the irruption occurs.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the disconnection does not occur and the irruption happens.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the responsibleness occurs.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the crosswiseness occurs.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the Pharaonicness does not occur but the nagging Goethe happens.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: that the chain-smoking does not occur is right.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the irruption does not occur.; int7 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__