both the disrupting and the ictalness happens.
sent1: if the Semite does not occur both the ictalness and the ditch happens. sent2: if the disrupting does not occur then the fact that both the artiodactyl and the conicness occurs is not right. sent3: if the ditching does not occur the fact that the disrupting occurs and the ictalness happens does not hold. sent4: the Semite does not occur. sent5: that the Semite happens and the narrowing rondelet does not occur is false if the Leviticalness happens. sent6: the fact that that the non-artiodactylness and the conic occurs is not right hold if the fact that the disrupting does not occur is not wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the disrupting does not occur.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the non-artiodactylness and the conic occurs is not true.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: both the ictalness and the ditch occurs.; int2 -> int3: the ictalness happens.;
that the fact that both the disrupting and the ictalness happens is true is not right.
$hypothesis$ = both the disrupting and the ictalness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Semite does not occur both the ictalness and the ditch happens. sent2: if the disrupting does not occur then the fact that both the artiodactyl and the conicness occurs is not right. sent3: if the ditching does not occur the fact that the disrupting occurs and the ictalness happens does not hold. sent4: the Semite does not occur. sent5: that the Semite happens and the narrowing rondelet does not occur is false if the Leviticalness happens. sent6: the fact that that the non-artiodactylness and the conic occurs is not right hold if the fact that the disrupting does not occur is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the disrupting does not occur.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the non-artiodactylness and the conic occurs is not true.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: both the ictalness and the ditch occurs.; int2 -> int3: the ictalness happens.; __UNKNOWN__