the hypnotizing Cancun occurs if the exclaiming saver happens.
sent1: both the exclaiming saver and the speakership happens. sent2: if the vesicalness occurs then the splurging occurs. sent3: if that not the blond but the transmission occurs does not hold then the strikeout happens. sent4: if the fact that both the autoradiographicness and the presentationalness occurs is not right then the consularness happens. sent5: the haranguing happens if the fact that the exclaiming saver does not occur and the speakership occurs is wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exclaiming saver occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the exclaiming saver does not occur but the speakership occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the exclaiming saver does not occur.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the exclaiming saver does not occur and the speakership happens does not hold.; sent5 & int3 -> int4: the harangue happens.;
$hypothesis$ = the hypnotizing Cancun occurs if the exclaiming saver happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the exclaiming saver and the speakership happens. sent2: if the vesicalness occurs then the splurging occurs. sent3: if that not the blond but the transmission occurs does not hold then the strikeout happens. sent4: if the fact that both the autoradiographicness and the presentationalness occurs is not right then the consularness happens. sent5: the haranguing happens if the fact that the exclaiming saver does not occur and the speakership occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exclaiming saver occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the exclaiming saver does not occur but the speakership occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the exclaiming saver does not occur.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the exclaiming saver does not occur and the speakership happens does not hold.; sent5 & int3 -> int4: the harangue happens.; __UNKNOWN__