that that the lawfulness occurs and the Hippocraticness does not occur is brought about by the fratricide is not right.
sent1: that the enfranchising glop does not occur is prevented by that the Hippocraticness happens. sent2: if the decisiveness and the pharmaceutical happens the trigger does not occur. sent3: the corrupting occurs. sent4: the fact that the fatigues happens is right. sent5: the fact that the coordination happens is right. sent6: the hat occurs. sent7: the honestness occurs. sent8: if the Teutonicness and the gastrostomy happens then the fact that the enfranchising squashed does not occur hold. sent9: the leaning Hereford does not occur. sent10: the bolt occurs. sent11: the enfranchising squashed happens if the abbreviation occurs. sent12: if the hell and the sureness occurs then the abbreviation does not occur. sent13: if the enfranchising glop and the fratricide happens then the coordination does not occur. sent14: the enfranchising asthenosphere occurs. sent15: the rummy occurs. sent16: if the honestness does not occur that the lawfulness does not occur is correct. sent17: the cataclinalness occurs. sent18: the toppedness happens but the leaning trigram does not occur. sent19: not the enfranchising glop but the Hippocraticness occurs if the fratricide does not occur. sent20: the bathing happens if the fact that the basalticness occurs but the pharmaceuticalness does not occur is not correct. sent21: that not the enfranchising glop but the Hippocraticness occurs yields that the repining uninsurability does not occur. sent22: the honestness triggers that the lawfulness occurs. sent23: that the Hemingwayesqueness occurs and the enfranchising articulator occurs is not wrong. sent24: the bathing prevents the honestness.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Hippocraticness occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the enfranchising glop happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fratricide happens.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: both the enfranchising glop and the fratricide happens.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the coordination does not occur.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the Hippocraticness does not occur.; sent22 & sent7 -> int6: the lawfulness occurs.; int5 & int6 -> int7: both the lawfulness and the non-Hippocraticness occurs.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
the repining uninsurability does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = that that the lawfulness occurs and the Hippocraticness does not occur is brought about by the fratricide is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the enfranchising glop does not occur is prevented by that the Hippocraticness happens. sent2: if the decisiveness and the pharmaceutical happens the trigger does not occur. sent3: the corrupting occurs. sent4: the fact that the fatigues happens is right. sent5: the fact that the coordination happens is right. sent6: the hat occurs. sent7: the honestness occurs. sent8: if the Teutonicness and the gastrostomy happens then the fact that the enfranchising squashed does not occur hold. sent9: the leaning Hereford does not occur. sent10: the bolt occurs. sent11: the enfranchising squashed happens if the abbreviation occurs. sent12: if the hell and the sureness occurs then the abbreviation does not occur. sent13: if the enfranchising glop and the fratricide happens then the coordination does not occur. sent14: the enfranchising asthenosphere occurs. sent15: the rummy occurs. sent16: if the honestness does not occur that the lawfulness does not occur is correct. sent17: the cataclinalness occurs. sent18: the toppedness happens but the leaning trigram does not occur. sent19: not the enfranchising glop but the Hippocraticness occurs if the fratricide does not occur. sent20: the bathing happens if the fact that the basalticness occurs but the pharmaceuticalness does not occur is not correct. sent21: that not the enfranchising glop but the Hippocraticness occurs yields that the repining uninsurability does not occur. sent22: the honestness triggers that the lawfulness occurs. sent23: that the Hemingwayesqueness occurs and the enfranchising articulator occurs is not wrong. sent24: the bathing prevents the honestness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Hippocraticness occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the enfranchising glop happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fratricide happens.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: both the enfranchising glop and the fratricide happens.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the coordination does not occur.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the Hippocraticness does not occur.; sent22 & sent7 -> int6: the lawfulness occurs.; int5 & int6 -> int7: both the lawfulness and the non-Hippocraticness occurs.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__