the fact that either the consultancy does not occur or the caning pomegranate happens or both is not true.
sent1: if the fact that the looming Jacobi occurs but the winnings does not occur does not hold then the looming Jacobi does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the caning pentoxide does not occur is not false the fact that both the expansiveness and the rejectiveness occurs is not right. sent3: the fact that the insularness occurs and the looming Jacobi happens is not true if the ovarianness does not occur. sent4: if the looming Jacobi does not occur the fact that the IRA does not occur and the caning pomegranate does not occur is not right. sent5: both the perceptibleness and the looming Jacobi occurs if the winnings does not occur. sent6: that the unexpansiveness occurs and the overtness occurs brings about that the looming chlorite does not occur. sent7: the fact that the consultancy does not occur or the caning pomegranate happens or both is wrong if that the overtness does not occur is not false. sent8: if the fact that the winnings and the ovarianness happens does not hold then the winnings does not occur. sent9: the rejectiveness does not occur if that the non-unexpansiveness and the rejectiveness occurs does not hold. sent10: the consultancy happens if the overtness does not occur. sent11: if that the IRA does not occur and the caning pomegranate does not occur is wrong the fact that the caning pentoxide does not occur hold. sent12: if the winnings does not occur the perceptibleness happens. sent13: if that both the insularness and the looming Jacobi happens is not true then the looming Jacobi does not occur. sent14: the consultancy happens. sent15: that the overtness does not occur and the unexpansiveness does not occur yields the caning pentoxide. sent16: if that the looming chlorite does not occur and the overtness occurs is not true the Hungarian occurs. sent17: that that the winnings occurs and the ovarianness occurs is correct is not correct. sent18: if the looming Jacobi occurs then the IRA occurs. sent19: if that the directing does not occur and the greeting does not occur is not right then the ovarianness does not occur. sent20: that the caning pentoxide does not occur is not incorrect. sent21: that the directing does not occur and the greeting does not occur is false if the monochromaticness does not occur. sent22: the fact that not the caning pentoxide but the unexpansiveness occurs is right. sent23: that the consultancy does not occur and/or that the caning pomegranate happens is brought about by that the caning pentoxide happens. sent24: the IRA does not occur if the looming chlorite does not occur. sent25: the perceptibleness occurs.
sent22 -> int1: the unexpansiveness happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the overtness happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: both the unexpansiveness and the overtness occurs.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the looming chlorite does not occur.; int3 & sent24 -> int4: the IRA does not occur.; sent8 & sent17 -> int5: the winnings does not occur.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the perceptibleness occurs and the looming Jacobi happens.; int6 -> int7: the looming Jacobi occurs.; sent18 & int7 -> int8: that the IRA happens is not wrong.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: that the overtness does not occur hold.; int10 & sent7 -> hypothesis;
the non-rejectiveness and the Hungarianness happens.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that either the consultancy does not occur or the caning pomegranate happens or both is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the looming Jacobi occurs but the winnings does not occur does not hold then the looming Jacobi does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the caning pentoxide does not occur is not false the fact that both the expansiveness and the rejectiveness occurs is not right. sent3: the fact that the insularness occurs and the looming Jacobi happens is not true if the ovarianness does not occur. sent4: if the looming Jacobi does not occur the fact that the IRA does not occur and the caning pomegranate does not occur is not right. sent5: both the perceptibleness and the looming Jacobi occurs if the winnings does not occur. sent6: that the unexpansiveness occurs and the overtness occurs brings about that the looming chlorite does not occur. sent7: the fact that the consultancy does not occur or the caning pomegranate happens or both is wrong if that the overtness does not occur is not false. sent8: if the fact that the winnings and the ovarianness happens does not hold then the winnings does not occur. sent9: the rejectiveness does not occur if that the non-unexpansiveness and the rejectiveness occurs does not hold. sent10: the consultancy happens if the overtness does not occur. sent11: if that the IRA does not occur and the caning pomegranate does not occur is wrong the fact that the caning pentoxide does not occur hold. sent12: if the winnings does not occur the perceptibleness happens. sent13: if that both the insularness and the looming Jacobi happens is not true then the looming Jacobi does not occur. sent14: the consultancy happens. sent15: that the overtness does not occur and the unexpansiveness does not occur yields the caning pentoxide. sent16: if that the looming chlorite does not occur and the overtness occurs is not true the Hungarian occurs. sent17: that that the winnings occurs and the ovarianness occurs is correct is not correct. sent18: if the looming Jacobi occurs then the IRA occurs. sent19: if that the directing does not occur and the greeting does not occur is not right then the ovarianness does not occur. sent20: that the caning pentoxide does not occur is not incorrect. sent21: that the directing does not occur and the greeting does not occur is false if the monochromaticness does not occur. sent22: the fact that not the caning pentoxide but the unexpansiveness occurs is right. sent23: that the consultancy does not occur and/or that the caning pomegranate happens is brought about by that the caning pentoxide happens. sent24: the IRA does not occur if the looming chlorite does not occur. sent25: the perceptibleness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
sent22 -> int1: the unexpansiveness happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the overtness happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: both the unexpansiveness and the overtness occurs.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the looming chlorite does not occur.; int3 & sent24 -> int4: the IRA does not occur.; sent8 & sent17 -> int5: the winnings does not occur.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the perceptibleness occurs and the looming Jacobi happens.; int6 -> int7: the looming Jacobi occurs.; sent18 & int7 -> int8: that the IRA happens is not wrong.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: that the overtness does not occur hold.; int10 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__