the repulsion does not occur if the dripping does not occur.
sent1: that not the dripping but the lithophyticness happens prevents that the repulsion does not occur. sent2: if the rationalizing wheedler happens and the GCA occurs the extensiveness does not occur. sent3: if the defenestration happens the brisantness does not occur. sent4: the sousing happens if the striping does not occur. sent5: the rationalizing eel does not occur. sent6: the lithophyticness happens. sent7: the standdown does not occur if not the basketry but the disintegrativeness happens. sent8: the refit does not occur but the apothecialness occurs. sent9: the repulsion or that the disengagement does not occur or both is caused by the non-syndeticness. sent10: the sentimentalising scam happens. sent11: the sentimentalising nonevent prevents the becoming. sent12: the liming vasectomy does not occur. sent13: the repulsion does not occur if the dripping and the lithophyticness happens. sent14: that the repulsion does not occur is caused by that not the drip but the lithophyticness occurs. sent15: the repulsion happens if the drip does not occur. sent16: the non-syndeticness and the rationalizing splint happens. sent17: that the nightcap occurs is right. sent18: the sentimentalising tetrahydrocannabinol does not occur but the Celticness happens. sent19: the neglecting jingoism does not occur if the permutation happens. sent20: that the farandole does not occur is brought about by that both the liming glomerule and the sentimentalising weatherstrip occurs. sent21: the syndeticness does not occur if that the accordance but not the national occurs is not true. sent22: that the repulsion occurs is prevented by that the drip occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the drip does not occur.; assump1 & sent6 -> int1: not the drip but the lithophyticness occurs.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the repulsion does not occur.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;
the elimination does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the repulsion does not occur if the dripping does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that not the dripping but the lithophyticness happens prevents that the repulsion does not occur. sent2: if the rationalizing wheedler happens and the GCA occurs the extensiveness does not occur. sent3: if the defenestration happens the brisantness does not occur. sent4: the sousing happens if the striping does not occur. sent5: the rationalizing eel does not occur. sent6: the lithophyticness happens. sent7: the standdown does not occur if not the basketry but the disintegrativeness happens. sent8: the refit does not occur but the apothecialness occurs. sent9: the repulsion or that the disengagement does not occur or both is caused by the non-syndeticness. sent10: the sentimentalising scam happens. sent11: the sentimentalising nonevent prevents the becoming. sent12: the liming vasectomy does not occur. sent13: the repulsion does not occur if the dripping and the lithophyticness happens. sent14: that the repulsion does not occur is caused by that not the drip but the lithophyticness occurs. sent15: the repulsion happens if the drip does not occur. sent16: the non-syndeticness and the rationalizing splint happens. sent17: that the nightcap occurs is right. sent18: the sentimentalising tetrahydrocannabinol does not occur but the Celticness happens. sent19: the neglecting jingoism does not occur if the permutation happens. sent20: that the farandole does not occur is brought about by that both the liming glomerule and the sentimentalising weatherstrip occurs. sent21: the syndeticness does not occur if that the accordance but not the national occurs is not true. sent22: that the repulsion occurs is prevented by that the drip occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the drip does not occur.; assump1 & sent6 -> int1: not the drip but the lithophyticness occurs.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the repulsion does not occur.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__