both the venipuncture and the non-betulaceousness happens if the dunning Inca occurs.
sent1: if that the subdividing Reykjavik and the non-allomorphicness happens does not hold then the subdividing Reykjavik does not occur. sent2: the urogenitalness does not occur. sent3: the catalectic occurs. sent4: if the controllership does not occur then the fact that the subdividing Reykjavik and the non-allomorphicness occurs is not correct. sent5: the photoemissiveness does not occur. sent6: the effect does not occur. sent7: the allomorphicness occurs and the controllership occurs. sent8: if the sigmoidness does not occur the venipuncture occurs and the dissuasion occurs. sent9: the dunning Inca is brought about by that the controllership happens and the betulaceousness occurs. sent10: that the sigmoidness happens is prevented by that the pilgrimage does not occur and the flex does not occur. sent11: the pilgrimage does not occur. sent12: the flexing does not occur. sent13: that the dunning Inca does not occur is triggered by that the controllership and the betulaceousness occurs.
sent7 -> int1: the controllership occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the betulaceousness occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the controllership happens and the betulaceousness happens.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the dunning Inca does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the dunning Inca occurs.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the betulaceousness does not occur.; sent11 & sent12 -> int6: the pilgrimage does not occur and the flex does not occur.; sent10 & int6 -> int7: the sigmoidness does not occur.; sent8 & int7 -> int8: both the venipuncture and the dissuasion occurs.; int8 -> int9: the venipuncture happens.; int5 & int9 -> int10: the venipuncture but not the betulaceousness happens.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis;
the subdividing Reykjavik does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = both the venipuncture and the non-betulaceousness happens if the dunning Inca occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the subdividing Reykjavik and the non-allomorphicness happens does not hold then the subdividing Reykjavik does not occur. sent2: the urogenitalness does not occur. sent3: the catalectic occurs. sent4: if the controllership does not occur then the fact that the subdividing Reykjavik and the non-allomorphicness occurs is not correct. sent5: the photoemissiveness does not occur. sent6: the effect does not occur. sent7: the allomorphicness occurs and the controllership occurs. sent8: if the sigmoidness does not occur the venipuncture occurs and the dissuasion occurs. sent9: the dunning Inca is brought about by that the controllership happens and the betulaceousness occurs. sent10: that the sigmoidness happens is prevented by that the pilgrimage does not occur and the flex does not occur. sent11: the pilgrimage does not occur. sent12: the flexing does not occur. sent13: that the dunning Inca does not occur is triggered by that the controllership and the betulaceousness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: the controllership occurs.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the betulaceousness occurs.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: the controllership happens and the betulaceousness happens.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the dunning Inca does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the dunning Inca occurs.; int3 & assump1 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int4 -> int5: the betulaceousness does not occur.; sent11 & sent12 -> int6: the pilgrimage does not occur and the flex does not occur.; sent10 & int6 -> int7: the sigmoidness does not occur.; sent8 & int7 -> int8: both the venipuncture and the dissuasion occurs.; int8 -> int9: the venipuncture happens.; int5 & int9 -> int10: the venipuncture but not the betulaceousness happens.; [assump1] & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__