the inspiration occurs.
sent1: that the white-collarness does not occur and the instructing sugared does not occur prevents the chirp. sent2: the fact that the Cockneiness occurs and the ballottement happens is wrong. sent3: if the bet does not occur the adjudication happens. sent4: that the instructing checkbook does not occur and the pneumococcalness does not occur prevents the non-Cockneiness. sent5: if that the kowtow happens and/or the betting does not occur does not hold the ballottement occurs. sent6: that the resilience and the murdering occurs is not right if that the rambling mystification does not occur hold. sent7: if the kowtow occurs then the adjudication occurs. sent8: the pneumococcalness does not occur if that both the resilience and the murdering happens is incorrect. sent9: the instructing checkbook does not occur if the fact that the instructing checkbook occurs and the scowling occurs does not hold. sent10: that the ballottement does not occur and the adjudication does not occur results in that the inspiration happens. sent11: if the frictionalness and the embracing happens the axing outwardness does not occur. sent12: the ballottement does not occur if the fact that the Cockney and the ballottement happens is not correct. sent13: that the pneumococcalness happens and the instructing checkbook occurs brings about the non-white-collarness. sent14: if the adjudication occurs and the chirp occurs then the fact that the inspiration does not occur is right. sent15: the instructing checkbook happens. sent16: if the agape does not occur the fact that the instructing checkbook happens and the scowling occurs is false. sent17: that the chirp and the instructing sugared occurs is brought about by that the white-collarness does not occur. sent18: that the pneumococcalness happens is not false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the kowtow happens or the betting does not occur or both does not hold.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the ballottement occurs.; sent12 & sent2 -> int2: the ballottement does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: either the kowtow occurs or the betting does not occur or both.; int4 & sent7 & sent3 -> int5: the adjudication happens.; sent18 & sent15 -> int6: the pneumococcalness happens and the instructing checkbook occurs.; sent13 & int6 -> int7: the white-collarness does not occur.; sent17 & int7 -> int8: both the chirp and the instructing sugared occurs.; int8 -> int9: the chirp happens.; int5 & int9 -> int10: the adjudication and the chirp happens.; int10 & sent14 -> hypothesis;
the inspiration happens.
$hypothesis$ = the inspiration occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the white-collarness does not occur and the instructing sugared does not occur prevents the chirp. sent2: the fact that the Cockneiness occurs and the ballottement happens is wrong. sent3: if the bet does not occur the adjudication happens. sent4: that the instructing checkbook does not occur and the pneumococcalness does not occur prevents the non-Cockneiness. sent5: if that the kowtow happens and/or the betting does not occur does not hold the ballottement occurs. sent6: that the resilience and the murdering occurs is not right if that the rambling mystification does not occur hold. sent7: if the kowtow occurs then the adjudication occurs. sent8: the pneumococcalness does not occur if that both the resilience and the murdering happens is incorrect. sent9: the instructing checkbook does not occur if the fact that the instructing checkbook occurs and the scowling occurs does not hold. sent10: that the ballottement does not occur and the adjudication does not occur results in that the inspiration happens. sent11: if the frictionalness and the embracing happens the axing outwardness does not occur. sent12: the ballottement does not occur if the fact that the Cockney and the ballottement happens is not correct. sent13: that the pneumococcalness happens and the instructing checkbook occurs brings about the non-white-collarness. sent14: if the adjudication occurs and the chirp occurs then the fact that the inspiration does not occur is right. sent15: the instructing checkbook happens. sent16: if the agape does not occur the fact that the instructing checkbook happens and the scowling occurs is false. sent17: that the chirp and the instructing sugared occurs is brought about by that the white-collarness does not occur. sent18: that the pneumococcalness happens is not false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the kowtow happens or the betting does not occur or both does not hold.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the ballottement occurs.; sent12 & sent2 -> int2: the ballottement does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: either the kowtow occurs or the betting does not occur or both.; int4 & sent7 & sent3 -> int5: the adjudication happens.; sent18 & sent15 -> int6: the pneumococcalness happens and the instructing checkbook occurs.; sent13 & int6 -> int7: the white-collarness does not occur.; sent17 & int7 -> int8: both the chirp and the instructing sugared occurs.; int8 -> int9: the chirp happens.; int5 & int9 -> int10: the adjudication and the chirp happens.; int10 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__