the fact that the blinding slack happens and the including Taxus occurs is not true.
sent1: if the fact that the blinding Explorer does not occur but the wheeling happens is incorrect the minorsness occurs. sent2: the including jactitation happens if both the non-minorsness and the nonreflectiveness happens. sent3: the spreading occurs and the persona happens. sent4: if the denigration does not occur the refuge happens. sent5: the incomparableness does not occur if the restarting advisability does not occur. sent6: if the wheeling does not occur then that the minorsness does not occur is not true. sent7: that the manhunt does not occur is brought about by that the wheeling happens and the blinding Explorer does not occur. sent8: that the blinding Explorer does not occur leads to the reflectiveness. sent9: if the denigration does not occur then both the including Taxus and the refuge occurs. sent10: that both the nonreflectiveness and the restarting Vermeer happens is wrong. sent11: if the fact that not the nonreflectiveness but the restarting Vermeer occurs is incorrect the nonreflectiveness happens. sent12: the denigration does not occur. sent13: the refuge happens. sent14: if the minorsness occurs the blinding slack occurs. sent15: that the refuge occurs and the restarting Vermeer does not occur is brought about by that the denigration happens. sent16: the noting occurs. sent17: the wheeling happens. sent18: the fact that that the non-nonreflectiveness and the restarting Vermeer happens is not correct hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blinding Explorer does not occur and the wheeling happens.; assump1 -> int1: the blinding Explorer does not occur.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the nonreflectiveness does not occur.; sent11 & sent18 -> int3: the nonreflectiveness occurs.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that not the blinding Explorer but the wheeling happens is not correct.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the fact that the minorsness happens hold.; int6 & sent14 -> int7: the blinding slack occurs.; sent9 & sent12 -> int8: both the including Taxus and the refuge happens.; int8 -> int9: the including Taxus happens.; int7 & int9 -> hypothesis;
the manhunt does not occur but the including jactitation happens.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the blinding slack happens and the including Taxus occurs is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the blinding Explorer does not occur but the wheeling happens is incorrect the minorsness occurs. sent2: the including jactitation happens if both the non-minorsness and the nonreflectiveness happens. sent3: the spreading occurs and the persona happens. sent4: if the denigration does not occur the refuge happens. sent5: the incomparableness does not occur if the restarting advisability does not occur. sent6: if the wheeling does not occur then that the minorsness does not occur is not true. sent7: that the manhunt does not occur is brought about by that the wheeling happens and the blinding Explorer does not occur. sent8: that the blinding Explorer does not occur leads to the reflectiveness. sent9: if the denigration does not occur then both the including Taxus and the refuge occurs. sent10: that both the nonreflectiveness and the restarting Vermeer happens is wrong. sent11: if the fact that not the nonreflectiveness but the restarting Vermeer occurs is incorrect the nonreflectiveness happens. sent12: the denigration does not occur. sent13: the refuge happens. sent14: if the minorsness occurs the blinding slack occurs. sent15: that the refuge occurs and the restarting Vermeer does not occur is brought about by that the denigration happens. sent16: the noting occurs. sent17: the wheeling happens. sent18: the fact that that the non-nonreflectiveness and the restarting Vermeer happens is not correct hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the blinding Explorer does not occur and the wheeling happens.; assump1 -> int1: the blinding Explorer does not occur.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the nonreflectiveness does not occur.; sent11 & sent18 -> int3: the nonreflectiveness occurs.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that not the blinding Explorer but the wheeling happens is not correct.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the fact that the minorsness happens hold.; int6 & sent14 -> int7: the blinding slack occurs.; sent9 & sent12 -> int8: both the including Taxus and the refuge happens.; int8 -> int9: the including Taxus happens.; int7 & int9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__