the extravagance happens.
sent1: the quarterback happens. sent2: if that the non-faucalness and the nonsuppurativeness happens is wrong the washing-up occurs. sent3: that the nonmechanicalness does not occur is triggered by that the quarterbacking occurs and the headway does not occur. sent4: the accelerating SACLANT happens if that the accelerating glove does not occur and the nonmechanicalness does not occur is not false. sent5: the majorness occurs if the waving drawback does not occur. sent6: the nonsuppurativeness occurs. sent7: the waving drawback does not occur. sent8: if the waving drawback does not occur the completion and the majoring happens. sent9: if the accelerating SACLANT happens then the extravagance occurs. sent10: that the accelerating glove does not occur is triggered by that the washing-up and the completion happens. sent11: if the nonsuppurativeness does not occur then the fact that the washing-up happens is true. sent12: the quarterbacking happens and the headway does not occur. sent13: the faucalness happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the non-faucalness and the nonsuppurativeness happens.; assump1 -> int1: that the faucalness does not occur hold.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that that both the non-faucalness and the nonsuppurativeness occurs hold is not true.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the washing-up occurs.; sent8 & sent7 -> int5: the completion and the major happens.; int5 -> int6: the completion happens.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the washing-up and the completion happens.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the accelerating glove does not occur.; sent3 & sent12 -> int9: that the nonmechanicalness does not occur hold.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the accelerating glove does not occur and the nonmechanicalness does not occur.; int10 & sent4 -> int11: the accelerating SACLANT happens.; int11 & sent9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the extravagance happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the quarterback happens. sent2: if that the non-faucalness and the nonsuppurativeness happens is wrong the washing-up occurs. sent3: that the nonmechanicalness does not occur is triggered by that the quarterbacking occurs and the headway does not occur. sent4: the accelerating SACLANT happens if that the accelerating glove does not occur and the nonmechanicalness does not occur is not false. sent5: the majorness occurs if the waving drawback does not occur. sent6: the nonsuppurativeness occurs. sent7: the waving drawback does not occur. sent8: if the waving drawback does not occur the completion and the majoring happens. sent9: if the accelerating SACLANT happens then the extravagance occurs. sent10: that the accelerating glove does not occur is triggered by that the washing-up and the completion happens. sent11: if the nonsuppurativeness does not occur then the fact that the washing-up happens is true. sent12: the quarterbacking happens and the headway does not occur. sent13: the faucalness happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the non-faucalness and the nonsuppurativeness happens.; assump1 -> int1: that the faucalness does not occur hold.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that that both the non-faucalness and the nonsuppurativeness occurs hold is not true.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the washing-up occurs.; sent8 & sent7 -> int5: the completion and the major happens.; int5 -> int6: the completion happens.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the washing-up and the completion happens.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the accelerating glove does not occur.; sent3 & sent12 -> int9: that the nonmechanicalness does not occur hold.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the accelerating glove does not occur and the nonmechanicalness does not occur.; int10 & sent4 -> int11: the accelerating SACLANT happens.; int11 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__