there exists something such that if it is not a sights then the fact that it is not a subordinateness and it is a Lambert is incorrect.
sent1: the fact that there is something such that if it is not zygomatic then the fact that it is transcultural and is unpropitious does not hold hold. sent2: if the macrophage is not a sights then it is not a subordinateness and it is a Lambert. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not indoor that it is a kind of chirpy a studentship does not hold. sent4: if the macrophage is cybernetic the fact that it is not a kind of a sights and it is a dysphoria is not correct. sent5: if the macrophage is not a kind of a sights the fact that it is not a subordinateness but a Lambert is incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not sight hold then it is not a subordinateness and is a Lambert. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not hydrocephalic then the fact that it is asyndetic thing that is bacteriological is false. sent8: the macrophage does not conscript Worcester and is trapezoidal if it is not a kind of a Lambert. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Florentine then the fact that it does grind entomion and it transships witch does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a sights that it is a subordinateness and is a Lambert is not correct. sent11: if the macrophage is not a sights then that it is a subordinateness and it is a Lambert is not correct. sent12: that something is not a blare and is trapezoidal does not hold if it is not a cuticle. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a donna the fact that it is both not a suborder and ministerial is false. sent14: if the macrophage does sight the fact that it is not a subordinateness and it is a Lambert is not right.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if that it is not a cuticle is right that it is not a blare and it is trapezoidal does not hold.
sent12 -> int1: if the baboon is not a cuticle then the fact that it is not a blare but trapezoidal is not true.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a sights then the fact that it is not a subordinateness and it is a Lambert is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that there is something such that if it is not zygomatic then the fact that it is transcultural and is unpropitious does not hold hold. sent2: if the macrophage is not a sights then it is not a subordinateness and it is a Lambert. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not indoor that it is a kind of chirpy a studentship does not hold. sent4: if the macrophage is cybernetic the fact that it is not a kind of a sights and it is a dysphoria is not correct. sent5: if the macrophage is not a kind of a sights the fact that it is not a subordinateness but a Lambert is incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not sight hold then it is not a subordinateness and is a Lambert. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not hydrocephalic then the fact that it is asyndetic thing that is bacteriological is false. sent8: the macrophage does not conscript Worcester and is trapezoidal if it is not a kind of a Lambert. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Florentine then the fact that it does grind entomion and it transships witch does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a sights that it is a subordinateness and is a Lambert is not correct. sent11: if the macrophage is not a sights then that it is a subordinateness and it is a Lambert is not correct. sent12: that something is not a blare and is trapezoidal does not hold if it is not a cuticle. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a donna the fact that it is both not a suborder and ministerial is false. sent14: if the macrophage does sight the fact that it is not a subordinateness and it is a Lambert is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__