the pose happens.
sent1: the fact that the closedness happens and the color does not occur is not correct. sent2: that the Frenching hypericism but not the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens is not true if the tastefulness does not occur. sent3: the fact that the fact that not the tastefulness but the vascularness occurs is not correct is not incorrect if the closedness does not occur. sent4: if the Frenching callosity does not occur the fact that the non-closedness and the non-colorness happens does not hold. sent5: if that the fruitage occurs is true the vascularness occurs. sent6: the fact that that both the non-tastefulness and the non-inferentialness happens is not right is not incorrect if the proliferating sagittate-leaf does not occur. sent7: the fact that the fact that the Frenching Hoffmann does not occur and the strain happens does not hold is not incorrect if the snicking parquetry happens. sent8: that if the fact that not the Frenching Hoffmann but the strain occurs is not correct the Sin does not occur is true. sent9: the snicking dinette happens. sent10: the peatiness and the proliferating telemetry happens if the gradation does not occur. sent11: the inferentialness occurs if that the closing occurs is not false. sent12: that the closing happens if that the closingness and the discolorness happens is false is not wrong. sent13: if the theocraticness happens then the snicking parquetry happens. sent14: the theocraticness occurs if the peatiness occurs. sent15: that the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens results in that the pose occurs. sent16: the catatonicness happens if the snicking dinette happens. sent17: that the closedness does not occur and the Frenching callosity does not occur is brought about by that the noncrucialness happens. sent18: if that the Frenching hypericism happens and the proliferating sagittate-leaf does not occur is false the posing occurs. sent19: if the Frenching hypericism happens then the fact that the proliferating sagittate-leaf does not occur is not wrong. sent20: the snicking dinette happens and the fruitage happens. sent21: the non-inferentialness is triggered by that the vascularness and the tastefulness occurs. sent22: that not the fruitage but the snicking dinette occurs prevents that the posing happens. sent23: the Frenching callosity does not occur and the noncrucialness does not occur. sent24: if that the proliferating bigamist does not occur and the noncrucialness does not occur is not right the noncrucialness occurs. sent25: that that the Frenching hypericism happens and the proliferating sagittate-leaf occurs is right is not right. sent26: that the Frenching hypericism happens and the colorness occurs is triggered by that the Sin does not occur. sent27: that the proliferating bigamist does not occur and the noncrucialness does not occur does not hold if the snicking grounding does not occur. sent28: the snicking grounding does not occur but the picturing occurs if the compulsion does not occur. sent29: the fact that both the Frenching hypericism and the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens does not hold if the tastefulness does not occur.
sent20 -> int1: the fruitage occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: that the vascularness occurs is true.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tastefulness happens.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: both the vascularness and the tastefulness happens.; int3 & sent21 -> int4: the fact that the inferentialness does not occur hold.; sent23 -> int5: the Frenching callosity does not occur.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: that both the non-closedness and the non-colorness occurs is false.; sent12 & int6 -> int7: the closedness occurs.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: the inferentialness happens.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the tastefulness does not occur.; int10 & sent2 -> int11: the fact that the Frenching hypericism but not the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens is false.; int11 & sent18 -> hypothesis;
the pose does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the pose happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the closedness happens and the color does not occur is not correct. sent2: that the Frenching hypericism but not the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens is not true if the tastefulness does not occur. sent3: the fact that the fact that not the tastefulness but the vascularness occurs is not correct is not incorrect if the closedness does not occur. sent4: if the Frenching callosity does not occur the fact that the non-closedness and the non-colorness happens does not hold. sent5: if that the fruitage occurs is true the vascularness occurs. sent6: the fact that that both the non-tastefulness and the non-inferentialness happens is not right is not incorrect if the proliferating sagittate-leaf does not occur. sent7: the fact that the fact that the Frenching Hoffmann does not occur and the strain happens does not hold is not incorrect if the snicking parquetry happens. sent8: that if the fact that not the Frenching Hoffmann but the strain occurs is not correct the Sin does not occur is true. sent9: the snicking dinette happens. sent10: the peatiness and the proliferating telemetry happens if the gradation does not occur. sent11: the inferentialness occurs if that the closing occurs is not false. sent12: that the closing happens if that the closingness and the discolorness happens is false is not wrong. sent13: if the theocraticness happens then the snicking parquetry happens. sent14: the theocraticness occurs if the peatiness occurs. sent15: that the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens results in that the pose occurs. sent16: the catatonicness happens if the snicking dinette happens. sent17: that the closedness does not occur and the Frenching callosity does not occur is brought about by that the noncrucialness happens. sent18: if that the Frenching hypericism happens and the proliferating sagittate-leaf does not occur is false the posing occurs. sent19: if the Frenching hypericism happens then the fact that the proliferating sagittate-leaf does not occur is not wrong. sent20: the snicking dinette happens and the fruitage happens. sent21: the non-inferentialness is triggered by that the vascularness and the tastefulness occurs. sent22: that not the fruitage but the snicking dinette occurs prevents that the posing happens. sent23: the Frenching callosity does not occur and the noncrucialness does not occur. sent24: if that the proliferating bigamist does not occur and the noncrucialness does not occur is not right the noncrucialness occurs. sent25: that that the Frenching hypericism happens and the proliferating sagittate-leaf occurs is right is not right. sent26: that the Frenching hypericism happens and the colorness occurs is triggered by that the Sin does not occur. sent27: that the proliferating bigamist does not occur and the noncrucialness does not occur does not hold if the snicking grounding does not occur. sent28: the snicking grounding does not occur but the picturing occurs if the compulsion does not occur. sent29: the fact that both the Frenching hypericism and the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens does not hold if the tastefulness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent20 -> int1: the fruitage occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: that the vascularness occurs is true.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tastefulness happens.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: both the vascularness and the tastefulness happens.; int3 & sent21 -> int4: the fact that the inferentialness does not occur hold.; sent23 -> int5: the Frenching callosity does not occur.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: that both the non-closedness and the non-colorness occurs is false.; sent12 & int6 -> int7: the closedness occurs.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: the inferentialness happens.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the tastefulness does not occur.; int10 & sent2 -> int11: the fact that the Frenching hypericism but not the proliferating sagittate-leaf happens is false.; int11 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__