that the falling prosiness but not the heaping occurs does not hold.
sent1: the noncyclicness occurs and the immunochemicalness happens. sent2: the tincturing newsreel does not occur or the messaging happens or both. sent3: the fair does not occur if the fact that both the non-immunochemicalness and the initiate occurs is wrong. sent4: that the initiate occurs prevents that the heaping occurs. sent5: the immunochemicalness does not occur if the fair happens. sent6: the uterineness happens if the tincturing newsreel does not occur. sent7: that the tincturing newsreel does not occur leads to that the falling prosiness happens and the uterineness occurs. sent8: the heaping is prevented by that the force does not occur and/or that the initiate happens. sent9: that the forcing and/or the fairness happens prevents that the immunochemicalness happens. sent10: if the tincturing newsreel does not occur and/or the messaging happens the tincturing newsreel does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the forcing occurs.; assump1 -> int1: either the forcing or the fairness or both occurs.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the immunochemicalness does not occur.; sent1 -> int3: the fact that the immunochemicalness occurs is correct.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the forcing does not occur.; int5 -> int6: the forcing does not occur or the initiating happens or both.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: that the heaping does not occur hold.; sent10 & sent2 -> int8: the tincturing newsreel does not occur.; sent7 & int8 -> int9: the falling prosiness occurs and the uterineness occurs.; int9 -> int10: the falling prosiness happens.; int7 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the bash does not occur or the taxonomicness occurs or both.
$hypothesis$ = that the falling prosiness but not the heaping occurs does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the noncyclicness occurs and the immunochemicalness happens. sent2: the tincturing newsreel does not occur or the messaging happens or both. sent3: the fair does not occur if the fact that both the non-immunochemicalness and the initiate occurs is wrong. sent4: that the initiate occurs prevents that the heaping occurs. sent5: the immunochemicalness does not occur if the fair happens. sent6: the uterineness happens if the tincturing newsreel does not occur. sent7: that the tincturing newsreel does not occur leads to that the falling prosiness happens and the uterineness occurs. sent8: the heaping is prevented by that the force does not occur and/or that the initiate happens. sent9: that the forcing and/or the fairness happens prevents that the immunochemicalness happens. sent10: if the tincturing newsreel does not occur and/or the messaging happens the tincturing newsreel does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the forcing occurs.; assump1 -> int1: either the forcing or the fairness or both occurs.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the immunochemicalness does not occur.; sent1 -> int3: the fact that the immunochemicalness occurs is correct.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the forcing does not occur.; int5 -> int6: the forcing does not occur or the initiating happens or both.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: that the heaping does not occur hold.; sent10 & sent2 -> int8: the tincturing newsreel does not occur.; sent7 & int8 -> int9: the falling prosiness occurs and the uterineness occurs.; int9 -> int10: the falling prosiness happens.; int7 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__