the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a hearthstone that excels it is not inadvisable does not hold.
sent1: that the wellpoint does not excel is right if it is both Orthodox and shallow-draft. sent2: if the wellpoint is inadvisable and is a kind of a frieze it is not a muezzin. sent3: there exists something such that if it is Byzantine thing that is a Abyssinian then it is not uncritical. sent4: the jackdaw is not Orthodox if it is an input and it talks condition. sent5: if the wellpoint is a hearthstone that does excel then it is not inadvisable. sent6: if something is a kind of a Donatist and it is insignificant then it does not crank lambdacism. sent7: the wellpoint is inadvisable if it is a hearthstone and excels. sent8: there is something such that if it is a hearthstone and it excels then it is inadvisable.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if it is a Donatist and it is not significant then it does not crank lambdacism.
sent6 -> int1: the anoa does not crank lambdacism if it is Donatist and it is not significant.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a hearthstone that excels it is not inadvisable does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the wellpoint does not excel is right if it is both Orthodox and shallow-draft. sent2: if the wellpoint is inadvisable and is a kind of a frieze it is not a muezzin. sent3: there exists something such that if it is Byzantine thing that is a Abyssinian then it is not uncritical. sent4: the jackdaw is not Orthodox if it is an input and it talks condition. sent5: if the wellpoint is a hearthstone that does excel then it is not inadvisable. sent6: if something is a kind of a Donatist and it is insignificant then it does not crank lambdacism. sent7: the wellpoint is inadvisable if it is a hearthstone and excels. sent8: there is something such that if it is a hearthstone and it excels then it is inadvisable. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__