the refreshing Eptesicus occurs.
sent1: if the vegetativeness does not occur that the greeting preserver does not occur and the spicateness does not occur is not correct. sent2: if the fact that the spicateness does not occur is not false then the fact that the marshalship does not occur but the refreshing Eptesicus occurs is not right. sent3: that the spicateness occurs leads to that the deregulation occurs. sent4: the deregulation occurs. sent5: if the marshalship does not occur either the saraband or the deregulation or both occurs. sent6: either the saraband occurs or the deregulation occurs or both. sent7: the non-vegetativeness causes that the spicateness does not occur and the greeting preserver occurs. sent8: that the marshalship does not occur brings about the saraband or that the deregulation does not occur or both. sent9: the refreshing Eptesicus occurs if the marshalship occurs. sent10: if the libidinalness does not occur the unintrusiveness and the non-vegetativeness occurs. sent11: the spicateness occurs. sent12: if the spicateness happens the fact that the fact that the saraband occurs and/or the deregulation does not occur is correct is not true.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the marshalship does not occur.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the saraband occurs or the deregulation does not occur or both.; sent12 & sent11 -> int2: the fact that either the saraband happens or the deregulation does not occur or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the marshalship occurs.; int4 & sent9 -> hypothesis;
the refreshing Eptesicus does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the refreshing Eptesicus occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the vegetativeness does not occur that the greeting preserver does not occur and the spicateness does not occur is not correct. sent2: if the fact that the spicateness does not occur is not false then the fact that the marshalship does not occur but the refreshing Eptesicus occurs is not right. sent3: that the spicateness occurs leads to that the deregulation occurs. sent4: the deregulation occurs. sent5: if the marshalship does not occur either the saraband or the deregulation or both occurs. sent6: either the saraband occurs or the deregulation occurs or both. sent7: the non-vegetativeness causes that the spicateness does not occur and the greeting preserver occurs. sent8: that the marshalship does not occur brings about the saraband or that the deregulation does not occur or both. sent9: the refreshing Eptesicus occurs if the marshalship occurs. sent10: if the libidinalness does not occur the unintrusiveness and the non-vegetativeness occurs. sent11: the spicateness occurs. sent12: if the spicateness happens the fact that the fact that the saraband occurs and/or the deregulation does not occur is correct is not true. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the marshalship does not occur.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the saraband occurs or the deregulation does not occur or both.; sent12 & sent11 -> int2: the fact that either the saraband happens or the deregulation does not occur or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the marshalship occurs.; int4 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__