that the citation does not occur and the argillaceousness happens does not hold.
sent1: if the exaggeration does not occur then that not the citation but the argillaceousness happens does not hold. sent2: that the lexicostatisticsness does not occur hold. sent3: that the mastoidness happens prevents the citation. sent4: if the Cromwellianness does not occur then both the argillaceousness and the understanding happens. sent5: that the exaggeration and the non-mastoidness happens is wrong. sent6: the identifying vestryman does not occur if that the rabbetting indomitability and the wearing reharmonization occurs does not hold. sent7: the winkling does not occur. sent8: if that the understanding does not occur is correct that the additive occurs and the astringing words happens is wrong. sent9: if the combining occurs the Cromwellianness does not occur and the wearing roble does not occur. sent10: the mastoidness does not occur if the astringing words does not occur. sent11: that the mastoidness and the exaggeration happens is caused by that the identifying vestryman does not occur. sent12: the understanding does not occur. sent13: either the identifying revetment occurs or the battering occurs or both if the bunco does not occur. sent14: if the fact that the additive and the astringing words happens is not correct then the mastoid does not occur. sent15: if the wearing exhibitionist does not occur the fact that the rabbetting indomitability and the wearing reharmonization occurs is incorrect.
sent8 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the additive and the astringing words occurs is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the mastoidness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exaggeration occurs.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: the exaggeration but not the mastoidness occurs.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the exaggeration does not occur.; int5 & sent1 -> hypothesis;
the citation does not occur but the argillaceousness happens.
$hypothesis$ = that the citation does not occur and the argillaceousness happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the exaggeration does not occur then that not the citation but the argillaceousness happens does not hold. sent2: that the lexicostatisticsness does not occur hold. sent3: that the mastoidness happens prevents the citation. sent4: if the Cromwellianness does not occur then both the argillaceousness and the understanding happens. sent5: that the exaggeration and the non-mastoidness happens is wrong. sent6: the identifying vestryman does not occur if that the rabbetting indomitability and the wearing reharmonization occurs does not hold. sent7: the winkling does not occur. sent8: if that the understanding does not occur is correct that the additive occurs and the astringing words happens is wrong. sent9: if the combining occurs the Cromwellianness does not occur and the wearing roble does not occur. sent10: the mastoidness does not occur if the astringing words does not occur. sent11: that the mastoidness and the exaggeration happens is caused by that the identifying vestryman does not occur. sent12: the understanding does not occur. sent13: either the identifying revetment occurs or the battering occurs or both if the bunco does not occur. sent14: if the fact that the additive and the astringing words happens is not correct then the mastoid does not occur. sent15: if the wearing exhibitionist does not occur the fact that the rabbetting indomitability and the wearing reharmonization occurs is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the additive and the astringing words occurs is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the mastoidness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exaggeration occurs.; int2 & assump1 -> int3: the exaggeration but not the mastoidness occurs.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the exaggeration does not occur.; int5 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__