that there exists something such that if the fact that it is marly thing that is an amateurism does not hold then it is not a Nepa is not correct.
sent1: if the jellyfish is not a kind of an amateurism that it is not a kind of a Nepa is true. sent2: there is something such that if that it is marly and it is a kind of an amateurism is not right then it is a Nepa. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a East-sider and it skids blown does not hold then it is not a aphakic. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not bilk reductio it is not a kind of a micelle. sent5: if the jellyfish is marly and is a kind of an amateurism it is not a Nepa. sent6: there exists something such that if that it is a Lancelot and it does extricate patio is not true then it is not a dirk. sent7: if the jellyfish is aeriferous thing that is an amateurism then it is not a ROI. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not marly the fact that it is not a Nepa is not false. sent9: if the fact that the jellyfish is marly and it is an amateurism is wrong it is not a kind of a Nepa. sent10: the jellyfish is not a rockchuck if it is not efficacious and it is kinesthetic. sent11: the fact that there is something such that if that it is a East-sider and is a processional is not right it is a groundcover is right. sent12: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a peer and it is a Salish is wrong it is not a hurl. sent13: if that something is a kind of a Nepa and it is Hugoesque is false it does not disclose.
sent9 -> hypothesis;
if that the piste is a Nepa and it is Hugoesque is incorrect then it does not disclose.
sent13 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it is marly thing that is an amateurism does not hold then it is not a Nepa is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the jellyfish is not a kind of an amateurism that it is not a kind of a Nepa is true. sent2: there is something such that if that it is marly and it is a kind of an amateurism is not right then it is a Nepa. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a East-sider and it skids blown does not hold then it is not a aphakic. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not bilk reductio it is not a kind of a micelle. sent5: if the jellyfish is marly and is a kind of an amateurism it is not a Nepa. sent6: there exists something such that if that it is a Lancelot and it does extricate patio is not true then it is not a dirk. sent7: if the jellyfish is aeriferous thing that is an amateurism then it is not a ROI. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not marly the fact that it is not a Nepa is not false. sent9: if the fact that the jellyfish is marly and it is an amateurism is wrong it is not a kind of a Nepa. sent10: the jellyfish is not a rockchuck if it is not efficacious and it is kinesthetic. sent11: the fact that there is something such that if that it is a East-sider and is a processional is not right it is a groundcover is right. sent12: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a peer and it is a Salish is wrong it is not a hurl. sent13: if that something is a kind of a Nepa and it is Hugoesque is false it does not disclose. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__