the fact that the heroic does not occur and the honeying shmooze does not occur does not hold if the torturing Caldwell does not occur.
sent1: the fact that not the heroic but the honeying shmooze occurs does not hold if the torturing Caldwell does not occur. sent2: that the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness occurs causes the non-infallibleness. sent3: the intrasententialness does not occur. sent4: the torturing Caldwell occurs if the fact that both the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness occurs is not correct. sent5: if the infallibleness does not occur then the fact that the heroic does not occur and the honeying shmooze does not occur is not true. sent6: if the fact that the infallibleness occurs is not wrong that the cupping does not occur and the field-cropness does not occur is wrong.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness occurs is wrong.; sent4 & assump2 -> int1: the torturing Caldwell happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the torturing Caldwell does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness happens.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the infallibleness does not occur.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the heroic does not occur and the honeying shmooze does not occur does not hold.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the cupping does not occur and the field-cropness does not occur is not true.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the heroic does not occur and the honeying shmooze does not occur does not hold if the torturing Caldwell does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that not the heroic but the honeying shmooze occurs does not hold if the torturing Caldwell does not occur. sent2: that the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness occurs causes the non-infallibleness. sent3: the intrasententialness does not occur. sent4: the torturing Caldwell occurs if the fact that both the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness occurs is not correct. sent5: if the infallibleness does not occur then the fact that the heroic does not occur and the honeying shmooze does not occur is not true. sent6: if the fact that the infallibleness occurs is not wrong that the cupping does not occur and the field-cropness does not occur is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the fact that the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness occurs is wrong.; sent4 & assump2 -> int1: the torturing Caldwell happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the torturing Caldwell does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the non-nebularness and the non-intrasententialness happens.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the infallibleness does not occur.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the heroic does not occur and the honeying shmooze does not occur does not hold.; [assump1] & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__