that not the churning veil but the rapping cross-pollination occurs is not true if that the victualling happens is correct.
sent1: the plunk does not occur and the overcoming does not occur. sent2: if that both the non-Ceyloneseness and the rapping iconoclasm occurs does not hold then that the victualling does not occur is not wrong. sent3: the fact that not the churning veil but the rapping cross-pollination happens is wrong if the nonvolatileness does not occur. sent4: the souring does not occur. sent5: that the sensorimotorness does not occur yields that the non-souredness and the non-nonvolatileness occurs. sent6: if the sensorimotorness happens then that the non-Ceyloneseness and the rapping iconoclasm happens is not correct. sent7: if the rapping iconoclasm does not occur the victualling does not occur. sent8: that the churning veil occurs and the rapping cross-pollination occurs is not true. sent9: that the souring does not occur is triggered by that the sensorimotorness does not occur.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the victualling happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sensorimotorness occurs.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that both the non-Ceyloneseness and the rapping iconoclasm occurs does not hold.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the victualling does not occur.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the sensorimotorness does not occur.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the souring does not occur and the nonvolatileness does not occur.; int5 -> int6: the nonvolatileness does not occur.; sent3 & int6 -> int7: that the churning veil does not occur but the rapping cross-pollination occurs is incorrect.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that not the churning veil but the rapping cross-pollination occurs is not true if that the victualling happens is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the plunk does not occur and the overcoming does not occur. sent2: if that both the non-Ceyloneseness and the rapping iconoclasm occurs does not hold then that the victualling does not occur is not wrong. sent3: the fact that not the churning veil but the rapping cross-pollination happens is wrong if the nonvolatileness does not occur. sent4: the souring does not occur. sent5: that the sensorimotorness does not occur yields that the non-souredness and the non-nonvolatileness occurs. sent6: if the sensorimotorness happens then that the non-Ceyloneseness and the rapping iconoclasm happens is not correct. sent7: if the rapping iconoclasm does not occur the victualling does not occur. sent8: that the churning veil occurs and the rapping cross-pollination occurs is not true. sent9: that the souring does not occur is triggered by that the sensorimotorness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the victualling happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sensorimotorness occurs.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that both the non-Ceyloneseness and the rapping iconoclasm occurs does not hold.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the victualling does not occur.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the sensorimotorness does not occur.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the souring does not occur and the nonvolatileness does not occur.; int5 -> int6: the nonvolatileness does not occur.; sent3 & int6 -> int7: that the churning veil does not occur but the rapping cross-pollination occurs is incorrect.; [assump2] & int7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__