that if the cascading Sartre does not occur then not the sunshine but the sunset happens does not hold.
sent1: the sarcolemmalness occurs. sent2: the salting happens. sent3: the cascading Sartre happens if the sunshine occurs. sent4: the sunset occurs if the cascading eyed does not occur. sent5: if the fact that not the forcipateness but the cascading eyed occurs is false the sunset occurs. sent6: both the confederating keen and the radicalness occurs. sent7: if the confederating keen happens then that not the forcipateness but the cascading eyed happens is not right. sent8: that the cenogeneticness and the confederating marten happens is right. sent9: the deactivating ablaut happens. sent10: that not the chugging but the intending occurs is wrong. sent11: not the deactivating Dreyfus but the confederating pheno-safranine happens. sent12: the fact that the cascading heterostracan occurs and the deactivating bain-marie occurs does not hold. sent13: the deactivating spectrometer occurs and the fire happens. sent14: the nonfeasance occurs if the confederating archine happens. sent15: if the deactivating income occurs then the immunotherapy occurs. sent16: the seduction happens and the glissading happens. sent17: the knockout happens and the tertianness happens. sent18: not the confederating amblygonite but the Ephesians occurs if the nonfeasance happens.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the sunshine happens.; sent3 & assump2 -> int1: the cascading Sartre happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cascading Sartre does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the sunshine does not occur.; sent6 -> int4: the confederating keen occurs.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the forcipateness does not occur but the cascading eyed occurs does not hold.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the sunset occurs.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the sunshine does not occur but the sunset occurs.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that if the cascading Sartre does not occur then not the sunshine but the sunset happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the sarcolemmalness occurs. sent2: the salting happens. sent3: the cascading Sartre happens if the sunshine occurs. sent4: the sunset occurs if the cascading eyed does not occur. sent5: if the fact that not the forcipateness but the cascading eyed occurs is false the sunset occurs. sent6: both the confederating keen and the radicalness occurs. sent7: if the confederating keen happens then that not the forcipateness but the cascading eyed happens is not right. sent8: that the cenogeneticness and the confederating marten happens is right. sent9: the deactivating ablaut happens. sent10: that not the chugging but the intending occurs is wrong. sent11: not the deactivating Dreyfus but the confederating pheno-safranine happens. sent12: the fact that the cascading heterostracan occurs and the deactivating bain-marie occurs does not hold. sent13: the deactivating spectrometer occurs and the fire happens. sent14: the nonfeasance occurs if the confederating archine happens. sent15: if the deactivating income occurs then the immunotherapy occurs. sent16: the seduction happens and the glissading happens. sent17: the knockout happens and the tertianness happens. sent18: not the confederating amblygonite but the Ephesians occurs if the nonfeasance happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the sunshine happens.; sent3 & assump2 -> int1: the cascading Sartre happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cascading Sartre does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: the sunshine does not occur.; sent6 -> int4: the confederating keen occurs.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the forcipateness does not occur but the cascading eyed occurs does not hold.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the sunset occurs.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the sunshine does not occur but the sunset occurs.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__