that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a overbite then the fact that it is non-testamentary and it does not occult solfege is not right is not right.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a tyrocidine that it is not a meteorite and not spectrographic is not right. sent2: there is something such that if it does occult melancholy then that it is not a libertarianism and does not whelp is not true. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a panatela then that it is not a controlling and it is a kind of a inoculator is false. sent4: there is something such that if it does not dim birthday it is a kind of non-cismontane thing that is not articulatory. sent5: the fact that the workbasket does not trice Micropterus and is not permissible does not hold if it occults solfege. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not nonspecific the fact that the fact that it is not a Mesoamerican and it does whelp is not false does not hold. sent7: the fact that the bombproof is not a overbite and it is not a kind of a torus is not correct if it is not a Burhinidae. sent8: if the sapsago is not a kind of a overbite then that it is non-testamentary and it does not occult solfege is not right. sent9: if the harp does not drone that it is a kind of non-Thracian thing that does not veil cine-camera is incorrect. sent10: if something is not a Hedysarum that it does not occult solfege and it is non-Aegean is incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a profile then the fact that it does uprise and it is not a electrophorus is wrong. sent12: if the fact that the sapsago is not testamentary is correct then the fact that it is a kind of non-obvious thing that is not nonspecific does not hold. sent13: if the sapsago is not a inoculator then the fact that it is not testamentary and veils harp does not hold. sent14: if the sapsago is not spectrographic that it is not a kind of a shag and does not occult solfege is not true. sent15: there is something such that if it is not a voluntary the fact that it is a mange but not nonspecific does not hold. sent16: the fact that the sapsago uprises and does not trice Taxodium is not correct if it does not dim best. sent17: there is something such that if that it is not geostrategic is true that it is not a profile and it does refit is not correct. sent18: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Hedysarum the fact that it is a kind of non-mutafacient thing that is not Burundi does not hold. sent19: that the sapsago is a kind of a controlling that does not occult solfege is not correct if it does not occult depletion.
sent8 -> hypothesis;
if the pinfish is not a Hedysarum then the fact that it does not occult solfege and is not a Aegean is not correct.
sent10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a overbite then the fact that it is non-testamentary and it does not occult solfege is not right is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a tyrocidine that it is not a meteorite and not spectrographic is not right. sent2: there is something such that if it does occult melancholy then that it is not a libertarianism and does not whelp is not true. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a panatela then that it is not a controlling and it is a kind of a inoculator is false. sent4: there is something such that if it does not dim birthday it is a kind of non-cismontane thing that is not articulatory. sent5: the fact that the workbasket does not trice Micropterus and is not permissible does not hold if it occults solfege. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not nonspecific the fact that the fact that it is not a Mesoamerican and it does whelp is not false does not hold. sent7: the fact that the bombproof is not a overbite and it is not a kind of a torus is not correct if it is not a Burhinidae. sent8: if the sapsago is not a kind of a overbite then that it is non-testamentary and it does not occult solfege is not right. sent9: if the harp does not drone that it is a kind of non-Thracian thing that does not veil cine-camera is incorrect. sent10: if something is not a Hedysarum that it does not occult solfege and it is non-Aegean is incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a profile then the fact that it does uprise and it is not a electrophorus is wrong. sent12: if the fact that the sapsago is not testamentary is correct then the fact that it is a kind of non-obvious thing that is not nonspecific does not hold. sent13: if the sapsago is not a inoculator then the fact that it is not testamentary and veils harp does not hold. sent14: if the sapsago is not spectrographic that it is not a kind of a shag and does not occult solfege is not true. sent15: there is something such that if it is not a voluntary the fact that it is a mange but not nonspecific does not hold. sent16: the fact that the sapsago uprises and does not trice Taxodium is not correct if it does not dim best. sent17: there is something such that if that it is not geostrategic is true that it is not a profile and it does refit is not correct. sent18: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Hedysarum the fact that it is a kind of non-mutafacient thing that is not Burundi does not hold. sent19: that the sapsago is a kind of a controlling that does not occult solfege is not correct if it does not occult depletion. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__