the carotidness does not occur.
sent1: the seeping oxlip does not occur if that the leftfield and the fullness occurs is not true. sent2: that the responding does not occur is caused by that the carnivorousness occurs but the railroading does not occur. sent3: that the lumbosacralness but not the proconsulship occurs is not false if the shearing does not occur. sent4: that the sagging bulbul does not occur prevents that the seeping oxlip does not occur. sent5: that both the discouragement and the telephotography occurs is not right. sent6: that the fact that the dissuasion happens and the sagging hypogonadism happens is right is not true. sent7: that the thalloidness does not occur is true if the fact that the thalloidness but not the allegiance happens is not right. sent8: the routing does not occur. sent9: if the shearing does not occur the lumbosacralness occurs. sent10: both the shearing and the non-praetorianness occurs if the thalloidness does not occur. sent11: the routing occurs if the sagging remote does not occur. sent12: if that the curliness and the flame-out occurs is not right then the shear does not occur. sent13: if the sagging overturned does not occur then both the sagging remote and the routing happens. sent14: if the carotidness does not occur then that both the curliness and the flame-out occurs is not true. sent15: that the dictating accounting but not the dictating cathartid occurs results in that the expropriation does not occur. sent16: if not the lumbosacralness but the shear happens then the fact that the carotidness does not occur hold. sent17: that the lumbosacralness occurs and the proconsulship does not occur results in that the sagging remote does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the carotidness does not occur.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the curliness and the flame-out occurs does not hold.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the shear does not occur.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the lumbosacralness but not the proconsulship occurs.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the sagging remote does not occur.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the fact that the routing occurs is right.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the carotidness does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the carotidness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the seeping oxlip does not occur if that the leftfield and the fullness occurs is not true. sent2: that the responding does not occur is caused by that the carnivorousness occurs but the railroading does not occur. sent3: that the lumbosacralness but not the proconsulship occurs is not false if the shearing does not occur. sent4: that the sagging bulbul does not occur prevents that the seeping oxlip does not occur. sent5: that both the discouragement and the telephotography occurs is not right. sent6: that the fact that the dissuasion happens and the sagging hypogonadism happens is right is not true. sent7: that the thalloidness does not occur is true if the fact that the thalloidness but not the allegiance happens is not right. sent8: the routing does not occur. sent9: if the shearing does not occur the lumbosacralness occurs. sent10: both the shearing and the non-praetorianness occurs if the thalloidness does not occur. sent11: the routing occurs if the sagging remote does not occur. sent12: if that the curliness and the flame-out occurs is not right then the shear does not occur. sent13: if the sagging overturned does not occur then both the sagging remote and the routing happens. sent14: if the carotidness does not occur then that both the curliness and the flame-out occurs is not true. sent15: that the dictating accounting but not the dictating cathartid occurs results in that the expropriation does not occur. sent16: if not the lumbosacralness but the shear happens then the fact that the carotidness does not occur hold. sent17: that the lumbosacralness occurs and the proconsulship does not occur results in that the sagging remote does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the carotidness does not occur.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the curliness and the flame-out occurs does not hold.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the shear does not occur.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the lumbosacralness but not the proconsulship occurs.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the sagging remote does not occur.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the fact that the routing occurs is right.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__