that the ineffectiveness occurs and the symbolizing Molossidae does not occur does not hold.
sent1: the unshapeliness occurs. sent2: the hypotensive does not occur and the dominating rag does not occur. sent3: the fishing happens. sent4: both the symbolizing maildrop and the cardinalness happens. sent5: if the dominating fugacity and the cardinal happens the fact that the symbolizing Molossidae does not occur hold. sent6: the fact that not the ineffectiveness but the symbolizing Molossidae occurs is not correct if the fact that the symbolizing maildrop happens hold. sent7: the diagnosticness occurs and the dominating fugacity occurs if the democratization does not occur. sent8: that both the arboriculture and the hypotensive happens is not right if the cardinalness does not occur. sent9: that the democratization does not occur prevents that the arboriculture does not occur. sent10: the non-hypotensiveness is prevented by the arboriculture. sent11: the ineffectiveness occurs. sent12: the arboriculture happens if either the dominating fugacity does not occur or the democratization does not occur or both.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the dominating fugacity does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the dominating fugacity does not occur or the democratization does not occur or both.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the arboriculture occurs.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the hypotensiveness occurs.; sent2 -> int4: the hypotensive does not occur.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the dominating fugacity happens.; sent4 -> int7: the cardinal occurs.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the dominating fugacity and the cardinalness happens.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the symbolizing Molossidae does not occur.; int9 & sent11 -> hypothesis;
the diagnosticness happens.
$hypothesis$ = that the ineffectiveness occurs and the symbolizing Molossidae does not occur does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the unshapeliness occurs. sent2: the hypotensive does not occur and the dominating rag does not occur. sent3: the fishing happens. sent4: both the symbolizing maildrop and the cardinalness happens. sent5: if the dominating fugacity and the cardinal happens the fact that the symbolizing Molossidae does not occur hold. sent6: the fact that not the ineffectiveness but the symbolizing Molossidae occurs is not correct if the fact that the symbolizing maildrop happens hold. sent7: the diagnosticness occurs and the dominating fugacity occurs if the democratization does not occur. sent8: that both the arboriculture and the hypotensive happens is not right if the cardinalness does not occur. sent9: that the democratization does not occur prevents that the arboriculture does not occur. sent10: the non-hypotensiveness is prevented by the arboriculture. sent11: the ineffectiveness occurs. sent12: the arboriculture happens if either the dominating fugacity does not occur or the democratization does not occur or both. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the dominating fugacity does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the dominating fugacity does not occur or the democratization does not occur or both.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the arboriculture occurs.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the hypotensiveness occurs.; sent2 -> int4: the hypotensive does not occur.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the dominating fugacity happens.; sent4 -> int7: the cardinal occurs.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the dominating fugacity and the cardinalness happens.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the symbolizing Molossidae does not occur.; int9 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__