the biographicness occurs.
sent1: both the non-unserviceableness and the properness occurs if the unobjectionableness happens. sent2: that the enlivening guilt does not occur results in that the furrowing ANOVA but not the furrowing bryozoan happens. sent3: the enlivening fourth occurs if the unobjectionableness occurs. sent4: if the unserviceableness does not occur then the unobjectionableness or the furrowing Priam or both happens. sent5: the biographicness does not occur if the serviceableness and the properness occurs. sent6: the fact that both the enlivening stodge and the productiveness happens is not true. sent7: that the furrowing Priam happens triggers that not the unobjectionableness but the biographicness occurs. sent8: if the reassailing Seminole occurs then the fact that that the unobjectionableness does not occur and the furrowing Priam does not occur does not hold is not incorrect. sent9: the lectureship does not occur and the Voltarianness does not occur. sent10: if the furrowing bryozoan does not occur the biographicness occurs and the reassailing Seminole occurs. sent11: both the reassailing Seminole and the furrowing bryozoan occurs. sent12: if that the enlivening stodge and the productiveness happens is incorrect then the furrowing Priam does not occur.
sent12 & sent6 -> int1: the furrowing Priam does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the unobjectionableness does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the unobjectionableness does not occur and the furrowing Priam does not occur.; sent11 -> int3: the fact that the reassailing Seminole does not occur does not hold.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the unobjectionableness does not occur and the furrowing Priam does not occur is wrong.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the unobjectionableness happens is not false.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the unserviceableness does not occur but the properness occurs.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the enlivening fourth happens.
$hypothesis$ = the biographicness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: both the non-unserviceableness and the properness occurs if the unobjectionableness happens. sent2: that the enlivening guilt does not occur results in that the furrowing ANOVA but not the furrowing bryozoan happens. sent3: the enlivening fourth occurs if the unobjectionableness occurs. sent4: if the unserviceableness does not occur then the unobjectionableness or the furrowing Priam or both happens. sent5: the biographicness does not occur if the serviceableness and the properness occurs. sent6: the fact that both the enlivening stodge and the productiveness happens is not true. sent7: that the furrowing Priam happens triggers that not the unobjectionableness but the biographicness occurs. sent8: if the reassailing Seminole occurs then the fact that that the unobjectionableness does not occur and the furrowing Priam does not occur does not hold is not incorrect. sent9: the lectureship does not occur and the Voltarianness does not occur. sent10: if the furrowing bryozoan does not occur the biographicness occurs and the reassailing Seminole occurs. sent11: both the reassailing Seminole and the furrowing bryozoan occurs. sent12: if that the enlivening stodge and the productiveness happens is incorrect then the furrowing Priam does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent6 -> int1: the furrowing Priam does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the unobjectionableness does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the unobjectionableness does not occur and the furrowing Priam does not occur.; sent11 -> int3: the fact that the reassailing Seminole does not occur does not hold.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the unobjectionableness does not occur and the furrowing Priam does not occur is wrong.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: that the unobjectionableness happens is not false.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the unserviceableness does not occur but the properness occurs.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__