the philhellenicness occurs.
sent1: the chaetognathanness occurs and the bonneting puffer happens. sent2: that the shoplifting does not occur is brought about by that the chaetognathanness and the bonneting puffer happens. sent3: if that the branching does not occur hold that the philhellenicness happens but the shoplifting does not occur is wrong. sent4: if the fact that the simoom does not occur and the peatiness happens does not hold the greasing cowhide does not occur. sent5: if the predictableness happens then the fact that the fact that not the simoom but the peatiness occurs is not false is not true. sent6: the greasing cowhide does not occur and the branching does not occur.
sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the shoplifting does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the philhellenicness happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the philhellenicness occurs and the shoplifting does not occur.; sent6 -> int3: the branching does not occur.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the philhellenicness but not the shoplifting occurs does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the clearing algidity does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the philhellenicness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the chaetognathanness occurs and the bonneting puffer happens. sent2: that the shoplifting does not occur is brought about by that the chaetognathanness and the bonneting puffer happens. sent3: if that the branching does not occur hold that the philhellenicness happens but the shoplifting does not occur is wrong. sent4: if the fact that the simoom does not occur and the peatiness happens does not hold the greasing cowhide does not occur. sent5: if the predictableness happens then the fact that the fact that not the simoom but the peatiness occurs is not false is not true. sent6: the greasing cowhide does not occur and the branching does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the shoplifting does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the philhellenicness happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the philhellenicness occurs and the shoplifting does not occur.; sent6 -> int3: the branching does not occur.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the philhellenicness but not the shoplifting occurs does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__