the scourging does not occur.
sent1: that the snafuing does not occur is triggered by that the retraining and the drowsing Tussaud happens. sent2: the fact that the drowsing Tussaud occurs and the retraining occurs is right. sent3: either the thuggee does not occur or the calcificness occurs or both if the Resurrection does not occur. sent4: if the chopping does not occur the anthropologicalness and the violence happens. sent5: if the clogging does not occur then the baryticness does not occur and/or the nonoperationalness does not occur. sent6: if the spoofing horseradish occurs that the kiss does not occur hold. sent7: that both the drowsing Tussaud and the scourging occurs is brought about by that the retraining does not occur. sent8: if the retraining happens then the condonation happens. sent9: the fact that the spoofing horseradish does not occur and the kissing does not occur is false. sent10: the anthropologicalness does not occur if both the scourging and the condonation happens. sent11: that the spoofing horseradish occurs is not wrong if the non-baryticness and/or the non-nonoperationalness occurs. sent12: the chopping happens and the violence occurs if the kissing does not occur. sent13: that the Resurrection does not occur if the reciprocating anchor does not occur hold. sent14: the fact that the violence occurs and the chop happens is correct if the kissing does not occur. sent15: either the clog or the calcificness or both occurs. sent16: the fact that not the baryticness but the spoofing horseradish happens is not right if the nonoperationalness occurs. sent17: if the thuggee does not occur and/or the calcificness occurs the clogging does not occur. sent18: the chop does not occur if the fact that the spoofing horseradish does not occur and the kiss does not occur is not correct.
sent2 -> int1: the retraining happens.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the condonation occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scourging happens.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: both the scourging and the condonation happens.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the anthropologicalness does not occur.; sent18 & sent9 -> int5: the chop does not occur.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the anthropologicalness and the violence occurs.; int6 -> int7: the anthropologicalness happens.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis;
the snafuing does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the scourging does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the snafuing does not occur is triggered by that the retraining and the drowsing Tussaud happens. sent2: the fact that the drowsing Tussaud occurs and the retraining occurs is right. sent3: either the thuggee does not occur or the calcificness occurs or both if the Resurrection does not occur. sent4: if the chopping does not occur the anthropologicalness and the violence happens. sent5: if the clogging does not occur then the baryticness does not occur and/or the nonoperationalness does not occur. sent6: if the spoofing horseradish occurs that the kiss does not occur hold. sent7: that both the drowsing Tussaud and the scourging occurs is brought about by that the retraining does not occur. sent8: if the retraining happens then the condonation happens. sent9: the fact that the spoofing horseradish does not occur and the kissing does not occur is false. sent10: the anthropologicalness does not occur if both the scourging and the condonation happens. sent11: that the spoofing horseradish occurs is not wrong if the non-baryticness and/or the non-nonoperationalness occurs. sent12: the chopping happens and the violence occurs if the kissing does not occur. sent13: that the Resurrection does not occur if the reciprocating anchor does not occur hold. sent14: the fact that the violence occurs and the chop happens is correct if the kissing does not occur. sent15: either the clog or the calcificness or both occurs. sent16: the fact that not the baryticness but the spoofing horseradish happens is not right if the nonoperationalness occurs. sent17: if the thuggee does not occur and/or the calcificness occurs the clogging does not occur. sent18: the chop does not occur if the fact that the spoofing horseradish does not occur and the kiss does not occur is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the retraining happens.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the condonation occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scourging happens.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: both the scourging and the condonation happens.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the anthropologicalness does not occur.; sent18 & sent9 -> int5: the chop does not occur.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the anthropologicalness and the violence occurs.; int6 -> int7: the anthropologicalness happens.; int4 & int7 -> int8: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__