the fact that the exasperation is caused by the abrasion is incorrect.
sent1: the chain does not occur. sent2: if the chaining does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur the exasperation occurs. sent3: the fact that the redecorating mescal does not occur and the housewifery does not occur is not right. sent4: if the fact that the falling blameworthiness does not occur but the striping occurs is wrong then the falling blameworthiness occurs. sent5: the unreproducibleness occurs. sent6: that the chain but not the tincturing ax occurs brings about that the exasperation occurs. sent7: the daciticness does not occur if the fact that not the tincturing Akwa'ala but the analness occurs is not right. sent8: if that the exasperation does not occur hold the fact that not the violableness but the abrasion occurs is not right. sent9: the redecorating IT does not occur. sent10: if the fact that the non-violableness and the abrasion occurs is incorrect the violableness occurs. sent11: if that the fact that the chaining does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur is false hold then the abrasion happens. sent12: that the staving does not occur is brought about by that the falling bristle happens and the housewifery happens. sent13: the exasperation does not occur and the tincturing actuator occurs if the falling blameworthiness happens. sent14: if the chain happens then the abrasion does not occur. sent15: if that the chain does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur is not true then the abrasion does not occur. sent16: the fact that the tincturing Akwa'ala does not occur but the analness occurs is incorrect if the stave does not occur. sent17: that that the falling blameworthiness does not occur and the stripe occurs is wrong is not wrong if the souse happens. sent18: the fact that the chain occurs and the tincturing ax does not occur is not true. sent19: if the daciticness does not occur the sousing happens and the malignness happens.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the abrasion occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the chain does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur does not hold.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the abrasion does not occur.; assump2 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the chaining does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the exasperation happens.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the violableness happens.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the exasperation is caused by the abrasion is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the chain does not occur. sent2: if the chaining does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur the exasperation occurs. sent3: the fact that the redecorating mescal does not occur and the housewifery does not occur is not right. sent4: if the fact that the falling blameworthiness does not occur but the striping occurs is wrong then the falling blameworthiness occurs. sent5: the unreproducibleness occurs. sent6: that the chain but not the tincturing ax occurs brings about that the exasperation occurs. sent7: the daciticness does not occur if the fact that not the tincturing Akwa'ala but the analness occurs is not right. sent8: if that the exasperation does not occur hold the fact that not the violableness but the abrasion occurs is not right. sent9: the redecorating IT does not occur. sent10: if the fact that the non-violableness and the abrasion occurs is incorrect the violableness occurs. sent11: if that the fact that the chaining does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur is false hold then the abrasion happens. sent12: that the staving does not occur is brought about by that the falling bristle happens and the housewifery happens. sent13: the exasperation does not occur and the tincturing actuator occurs if the falling blameworthiness happens. sent14: if the chain happens then the abrasion does not occur. sent15: if that the chain does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur is not true then the abrasion does not occur. sent16: the fact that the tincturing Akwa'ala does not occur but the analness occurs is incorrect if the stave does not occur. sent17: that that the falling blameworthiness does not occur and the stripe occurs is wrong is not wrong if the souse happens. sent18: the fact that the chain occurs and the tincturing ax does not occur is not true. sent19: if the daciticness does not occur the sousing happens and the malignness happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the abrasion occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the chain does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur does not hold.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the abrasion does not occur.; assump2 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the chaining does not occur and the tincturing ax does not occur.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the exasperation happens.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__