the fact that the resentfulness happens if the scuffling does not occur and the closed-circuitness happens does not hold.
sent1: that the jar occurs is triggered by that the non-earthyness and the bottle occurs. sent2: if the German occurs the resentfulness happens. sent3: if both the scuffling and the singularizing purl occurs the German occurs. sent4: the diazotizing happens. sent5: the melanizing injury happens. sent6: the melanizing waddler does not occur but the chitinousness happens if the scuffle happens. sent7: the melanizing Narcissus happens. sent8: if the fact that the theoterrorism occurs and/or the devolving does not occur is false the resentfulness does not occur. sent9: the chitinousness happens. sent10: that the scuffling happens and the closed-circuitness occurs brings about the resentfulness. sent11: the closed-circuitness occurs. sent12: the Germanness happens if the scuffling does not occur and the singularizing purl happens. sent13: the singularizing purl happens. sent14: the Preakness happens. sent15: the singularizing ampleness occurs. sent16: that the rebellion does not occur and the ablation occurs yields the singularizing ampleness. sent17: the arborealness occurs. sent18: the pro-choiceness occurs. sent19: that the theoterrorism occurs and/or the devolving does not occur is incorrect if the lavage does not occur. sent20: the scuffle occurs if the fact that not the scuffle but the closed-circuitness happens is not right. sent21: that the melanizing giving does not occur is prevented by that not the flying but the .38-caliberness occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that not the scuffling but the closed-circuitness happens is true.; assump1 -> int1: the scuffle does not occur.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: not the scuffle but the singularizing purl happens.; sent12 & int2 -> int3: the Germanness happens.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the resentfulness happens.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the melanizing waddler does not occur and the chitinousness happens.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the resentfulness happens if the scuffling does not occur and the closed-circuitness happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the jar occurs is triggered by that the non-earthyness and the bottle occurs. sent2: if the German occurs the resentfulness happens. sent3: if both the scuffling and the singularizing purl occurs the German occurs. sent4: the diazotizing happens. sent5: the melanizing injury happens. sent6: the melanizing waddler does not occur but the chitinousness happens if the scuffle happens. sent7: the melanizing Narcissus happens. sent8: if the fact that the theoterrorism occurs and/or the devolving does not occur is false the resentfulness does not occur. sent9: the chitinousness happens. sent10: that the scuffling happens and the closed-circuitness occurs brings about the resentfulness. sent11: the closed-circuitness occurs. sent12: the Germanness happens if the scuffling does not occur and the singularizing purl happens. sent13: the singularizing purl happens. sent14: the Preakness happens. sent15: the singularizing ampleness occurs. sent16: that the rebellion does not occur and the ablation occurs yields the singularizing ampleness. sent17: the arborealness occurs. sent18: the pro-choiceness occurs. sent19: that the theoterrorism occurs and/or the devolving does not occur is incorrect if the lavage does not occur. sent20: the scuffle occurs if the fact that not the scuffle but the closed-circuitness happens is not right. sent21: that the melanizing giving does not occur is prevented by that not the flying but the .38-caliberness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that not the scuffling but the closed-circuitness happens is true.; assump1 -> int1: the scuffle does not occur.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: not the scuffle but the singularizing purl happens.; sent12 & int2 -> int3: the Germanness happens.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: the resentfulness happens.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__