the fact that there is something such that if that it is serviceable hold then the fact that it weeds Gruidae and is not a chaldron is not true is not correct.
sent1: if the PWR is a kind of a chaldron then the fact that it is nonharmonic and is diligent is false. sent2: that something is difficult thing that is not a sumac is not right if it fudges simpleton. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not non-diligent then the fact that it is a metaphor and it is not a tetranychid is not right. sent4: there is something such that if it does fudge gadgeteer then the fact that it is monotonic thing that does not fudge simpleton is wrong. sent5: if the PWR is serviceable then the fact that it does weed Gruidae and is not a chaldron is not correct. sent6: the fact that if something fudges river then that it does fudge eschatologist and does not spot knitter does not hold hold. sent7: the fact that there exists something such that if it is serviceable then it does weed Gruidae and is not a chaldron is not incorrect. sent8: the fact that there exists something such that if it is eruptive that it is both a procrastination and not a dubnium is not right hold. sent9: the fact that the fishmonger is a kainite but it is not a kind of a haggler is not correct if it is serviceable.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if it does fudge river then that it fudges eschatologist and it does not spot knitter is not right.
sent6 -> int1: the fact that the brook does fudge eschatologist but it does not spot knitter is not true if it fudges river.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it is serviceable hold then the fact that it weeds Gruidae and is not a chaldron is not true is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the PWR is a kind of a chaldron then the fact that it is nonharmonic and is diligent is false. sent2: that something is difficult thing that is not a sumac is not right if it fudges simpleton. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not non-diligent then the fact that it is a metaphor and it is not a tetranychid is not right. sent4: there is something such that if it does fudge gadgeteer then the fact that it is monotonic thing that does not fudge simpleton is wrong. sent5: if the PWR is serviceable then the fact that it does weed Gruidae and is not a chaldron is not correct. sent6: the fact that if something fudges river then that it does fudge eschatologist and does not spot knitter does not hold hold. sent7: the fact that there exists something such that if it is serviceable then it does weed Gruidae and is not a chaldron is not incorrect. sent8: the fact that there exists something such that if it is eruptive that it is both a procrastination and not a dubnium is not right hold. sent9: the fact that the fishmonger is a kainite but it is not a kind of a haggler is not correct if it is serviceable. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__