Assuming all the circumstances, as set out by the given question do come to pass, in a theoretical scenario, given an infinite amount of testcases, would it be safe to say, and furthermore, can it be set out as a given - after all of the necessary testing and sources of error have been accounted for - and we must consider, is this truly what we wish to find given such circumstances, assuming that they would come to pass - however unlikely that may in itself be - and questioning such details as: who would be the tester for all such test, and are they sufficiently unbiased, we must remember to also consider that such tests require a good deal of testing; as such we must first conclude that we are capable of doing the required quantity of testing - having all dependencies taken into consideration, and ensuring that they do not change; finally having considered such options as the aforementioned question, we must further question our motives for initially raising such a question, to ensure that the question itself is not questionable in nature - as many questions often are - and as such must incorporate countermeasures into our initial test cases in order to prevent our test cases from being invalidated by unknowns; an example of such would be oxygen - which could invalidate these questions; once all of these tests and test cases have been tested and confirmed for testing, we can begin our testing of the test cases, assuming however that all formal conduct has been validated, and we have ensured all legal binding documents have been properly bound in the correct binding; with all such thing accounted for we may now proceed to ask ourselves - in retrospect of course - Why?
