the smacker does not occur.
sent1: the non-catadromousness prevents that the seductiveness occurs. sent2: the seductiveness does not occur if that the catadromousness happens and the mix does not occur does not hold. sent3: if the postmodernistness occurs that the catadromousness but not the mix occurs is wrong. sent4: that the cornering does not occur and the bopping tosser does not occur prevents that the bibliophilicness occurs. sent5: the smacker does not occur if the bopping predecessor does not occur and the postmodernistness does not occur. sent6: if the smacker does not occur the seductiveness happens or the mix occurs or both. sent7: both the non-bibliophilicness and the undressing sawmill occurs. sent8: the bopping predecessor is prevented by that the bibliophilicness does not occur but the undressing sawmill occurs. sent9: if the seductiveness does not occur then the smacker happens. sent10: the undressing PR occurs if that the postmodernistness does not occur and the bopping predecessor does not occur is wrong. sent11: the bopping predecessor happens if the postmodernistness does not occur. sent12: that the postmodernistness does not occur and the bopping predecessor does not occur is wrong if the catadromousness does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the postmodernistness does not occur.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the bopping predecessor occurs.; sent8 & sent7 -> int2: the bopping predecessor does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the postmodernistness happens.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: that the catadromousness occurs but the mix does not occur is not right.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the seductiveness does not occur.; int6 & sent9 -> hypothesis;
the undressing PR happens.
$hypothesis$ = the smacker does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the non-catadromousness prevents that the seductiveness occurs. sent2: the seductiveness does not occur if that the catadromousness happens and the mix does not occur does not hold. sent3: if the postmodernistness occurs that the catadromousness but not the mix occurs is wrong. sent4: that the cornering does not occur and the bopping tosser does not occur prevents that the bibliophilicness occurs. sent5: the smacker does not occur if the bopping predecessor does not occur and the postmodernistness does not occur. sent6: if the smacker does not occur the seductiveness happens or the mix occurs or both. sent7: both the non-bibliophilicness and the undressing sawmill occurs. sent8: the bopping predecessor is prevented by that the bibliophilicness does not occur but the undressing sawmill occurs. sent9: if the seductiveness does not occur then the smacker happens. sent10: the undressing PR occurs if that the postmodernistness does not occur and the bopping predecessor does not occur is wrong. sent11: the bopping predecessor happens if the postmodernistness does not occur. sent12: that the postmodernistness does not occur and the bopping predecessor does not occur is wrong if the catadromousness does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the postmodernistness does not occur.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the bopping predecessor occurs.; sent8 & sent7 -> int2: the bopping predecessor does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the postmodernistness happens.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: that the catadromousness occurs but the mix does not occur is not right.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the seductiveness does not occur.; int6 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__