that the interoceptiveness does not occur but the aid occurs does not hold if the epicyclicness does not occur.
sent1: the unsalableness occurs. sent2: the artificialness happens. sent3: if the epicyclicness does not occur the non-interoceptiveness and the aid happens. sent4: the fact that the interoceptiveness does not occur is correct. sent5: that the interoceptiveness does not occur but the aid happens leads to that the epicyclicness occurs. sent6: the ballup does not occur. sent7: that the ending occurs and the rustling Witwatersrand happens is not correct if the pilferage does not occur. sent8: if the unspelling postage does not occur then the non-directedness and the despairing radiography occurs. sent9: that the congestiveness occurs is brought about by the habiting Saussurea. sent10: not the sediment but the provencalness occurs. sent11: if that the detente does not occur is not incorrect then the fact that the choricness happens and the unspelling unwholesomeness occurs is incorrect. sent12: that the epicyclicness happens is caused by that the interoceptiveness and the aid happens. sent13: the fruiting does not occur. sent14: that the motorcade does not occur but the unspelling bedrest happens is brought about by the nonaddictiveness. sent15: not the juridicalness but the licitness occurs. sent16: not the puzzling but the card occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the interoceptiveness does not occur but the aid occurs.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the epicyclicness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the epicyclicness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that not the interoceptiveness but the aid happens is incorrect.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis;
the congestiveness happens.
$hypothesis$ = that the interoceptiveness does not occur but the aid occurs does not hold if the epicyclicness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the unsalableness occurs. sent2: the artificialness happens. sent3: if the epicyclicness does not occur the non-interoceptiveness and the aid happens. sent4: the fact that the interoceptiveness does not occur is correct. sent5: that the interoceptiveness does not occur but the aid happens leads to that the epicyclicness occurs. sent6: the ballup does not occur. sent7: that the ending occurs and the rustling Witwatersrand happens is not correct if the pilferage does not occur. sent8: if the unspelling postage does not occur then the non-directedness and the despairing radiography occurs. sent9: that the congestiveness occurs is brought about by the habiting Saussurea. sent10: not the sediment but the provencalness occurs. sent11: if that the detente does not occur is not incorrect then the fact that the choricness happens and the unspelling unwholesomeness occurs is incorrect. sent12: that the epicyclicness happens is caused by that the interoceptiveness and the aid happens. sent13: the fruiting does not occur. sent14: that the motorcade does not occur but the unspelling bedrest happens is brought about by the nonaddictiveness. sent15: not the juridicalness but the licitness occurs. sent16: not the puzzling but the card occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the interoceptiveness does not occur but the aid occurs.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the epicyclicness happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the epicyclicness does not occur.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that not the interoceptiveness but the aid happens is incorrect.; [assump2] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__