that the uncluttering happens if the burrowing happens does not hold.
sent1: the fact that the unprovocativeness does not occur is true. sent2: the moving velum does not occur. sent3: if that the hotbedness does not occur hold then that both the prowling and the lob occurs is false. sent4: the fact that that both the arboricalness and the evading happens hold does not hold if the moving velum does not occur. sent5: that the burrow does not occur is correct if not the evading but the stigmatization occurs. sent6: if that the arboricalness happens and the evading occurs is not right the evading does not occur. sent7: not the redetermination but the aggregating prolixity happens if the uncluttering does not occur. sent8: the aggregating prolixity happens. sent9: if the evading does not occur but the stigmatization occurs the burrowing happens. sent10: if the uncluttering does not occur the aggregating prolixity occurs. sent11: the stigmatization is brought about by that the redetermination does not occur but the aggregating prolixity occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the uncluttering does not occur.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the redetermination does not occur and the aggregating prolixity occurs.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the stigmatization happens.; sent4 & sent2 -> int3: the fact that the arboricalness and the evading happens is not correct.; sent6 & int3 -> int4: that the evading does not occur is correct.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the evading does not occur and the stigmatization happens.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the burrow does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the burrowing occurs.; int6 & assump2 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the uncluttering happens.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that the uncluttering happens if the burrowing happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the unprovocativeness does not occur is true. sent2: the moving velum does not occur. sent3: if that the hotbedness does not occur hold then that both the prowling and the lob occurs is false. sent4: the fact that that both the arboricalness and the evading happens hold does not hold if the moving velum does not occur. sent5: that the burrow does not occur is correct if not the evading but the stigmatization occurs. sent6: if that the arboricalness happens and the evading occurs is not right the evading does not occur. sent7: not the redetermination but the aggregating prolixity happens if the uncluttering does not occur. sent8: the aggregating prolixity happens. sent9: if the evading does not occur but the stigmatization occurs the burrowing happens. sent10: if the uncluttering does not occur the aggregating prolixity occurs. sent11: the stigmatization is brought about by that the redetermination does not occur but the aggregating prolixity occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the uncluttering does not occur.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the redetermination does not occur and the aggregating prolixity occurs.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the stigmatization happens.; sent4 & sent2 -> int3: the fact that the arboricalness and the evading happens is not correct.; sent6 & int3 -> int4: that the evading does not occur is correct.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the evading does not occur and the stigmatization happens.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the burrow does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the burrowing occurs.; int6 & assump2 -> int7: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int7 -> int8: the uncluttering happens.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__