the smut happens.
sent1: the fact that the non-heuristicness and the whoopee occurs does not hold if the floodhead does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the clanking beech does not occur hold then that the smut and the backspin happens hold. sent3: the whoopee does not occur. sent4: if the backspin does not occur the smutting does not occur. sent5: the floodhead does not occur if the fact that the DO occurs and the floodhead happens is incorrect. sent6: that the Assameseness does not occur is not incorrect. sent7: the clanking beech happens. sent8: the heuristic does not occur if the fact that the heuristic happens but the floodhead does not occur is wrong. sent9: the sublimating is triggered by that not the clanking militant but the heuristic occurs. sent10: if that the whoopee does not occur is not right the fact that the heuristic but not the floodhead happens does not hold. sent11: if the backspin and the clanking beech happens then the sublimating does not occur. sent12: if the whoopee does not occur then the clanking militant does not occur but the heuristic occurs. sent13: that the backspin and the monoclonalness happens is caused by that the clanking beech does not occur. sent14: both the smut and the clanking militant happens if the heuristicness does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the backspin happens.; assump1 & sent7 -> int1: the backspin occurs and the clanking beech happens.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the sublimating does not occur.; sent12 & sent3 -> int3: the clanking militant does not occur but the heuristicness occurs.; sent9 & int3 -> int4: the sublimating occurs.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the backspin does not occur.; int6 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the monoclonal occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the smut happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the non-heuristicness and the whoopee occurs does not hold if the floodhead does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the clanking beech does not occur hold then that the smut and the backspin happens hold. sent3: the whoopee does not occur. sent4: if the backspin does not occur the smutting does not occur. sent5: the floodhead does not occur if the fact that the DO occurs and the floodhead happens is incorrect. sent6: that the Assameseness does not occur is not incorrect. sent7: the clanking beech happens. sent8: the heuristic does not occur if the fact that the heuristic happens but the floodhead does not occur is wrong. sent9: the sublimating is triggered by that not the clanking militant but the heuristic occurs. sent10: if that the whoopee does not occur is not right the fact that the heuristic but not the floodhead happens does not hold. sent11: if the backspin and the clanking beech happens then the sublimating does not occur. sent12: if the whoopee does not occur then the clanking militant does not occur but the heuristic occurs. sent13: that the backspin and the monoclonalness happens is caused by that the clanking beech does not occur. sent14: both the smut and the clanking militant happens if the heuristicness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the backspin happens.; assump1 & sent7 -> int1: the backspin occurs and the clanking beech happens.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the sublimating does not occur.; sent12 & sent3 -> int3: the clanking militant does not occur but the heuristicness occurs.; sent9 & int3 -> int4: the sublimating occurs.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the backspin does not occur.; int6 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__