the fact that if the barrel does not occur then the offense does not occur is incorrect.
sent1: the wonder but not the clangoring tobramycin happens. sent2: if the delusion occurs the brahminicness occurs. sent3: the Peloponnesianness occurs if the fact that the obeying Bluegrass but not the Wiccanness occurs is not correct. sent4: the retouching aperitif occurs and the conveying happens. sent5: the fact that the offense does not occur is correct if both the brahminicness and the conveying happens. sent6: if that the barreling does not occur is not incorrect then the offense happens. sent7: if the fact that the barrel occurs but the delusion does not occur does not hold then the brahminicness occurs. sent8: the offense does not occur if the barrel occurs. sent9: the fact that the premising logarithm happens is correct. sent10: the delusion does not occur.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the barrel but not the delusion happens.; assump2 -> int1: the barrel happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the barrel does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the barrel occurs and the delusion does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: the brahminicness occurs.; sent4 -> int5: the fact that the conveying occurs is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the brahminicness and the conveying happens.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the offense does not occur.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the barrel does not occur then the offense does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the wonder but not the clangoring tobramycin happens. sent2: if the delusion occurs the brahminicness occurs. sent3: the Peloponnesianness occurs if the fact that the obeying Bluegrass but not the Wiccanness occurs is not correct. sent4: the retouching aperitif occurs and the conveying happens. sent5: the fact that the offense does not occur is correct if both the brahminicness and the conveying happens. sent6: if that the barreling does not occur is not incorrect then the offense happens. sent7: if the fact that the barrel occurs but the delusion does not occur does not hold then the brahminicness occurs. sent8: the offense does not occur if the barrel occurs. sent9: the fact that the premising logarithm happens is correct. sent10: the delusion does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the barrel but not the delusion happens.; assump2 -> int1: the barrel happens.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the barrel does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the barrel occurs and the delusion does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: the brahminicness occurs.; sent4 -> int5: the fact that the conveying occurs is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the brahminicness and the conveying happens.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the offense does not occur.; [assump1] & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__