that there exists something such that if that it is unforgettable is correct then the fact that it is both a bogey and not brazen is not true is not right.
sent1: that the fact that the lumen is erect but not a dinosaur does not hold is true if it is unpronounceable. sent2: that the lumen is a plaza and is a trilobite is false if it is eugenic. sent3: if the metaproterenol incarnates the fact that it is casuistic and it is ascensional is not right. sent4: if the lumen is unforgettable the fact that it bogeys and it is not brazen is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if it is ascensional that it does multiply heartland and is a double-prop is incorrect. sent6: that that the lumen is unforgettable and a Neohygrophorus is not true is not wrong if it is resistible. sent7: the bulbil does collogue but it is not hydrophobic if it is a Rossini. sent8: if the lumen is unforgettable the fact that it is a kind of a bogey that brazens is incorrect. sent9: that the lumen is a ghrelin and does not brazen is not false if it multiplies babu. sent10: if the shipside does patronage bulbil the fact that it is geodetic and ascensional is not right. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a table that it is monumental and it is not unwholesome does not hold. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a tragopan that that it does wreathe and is a kind of an implantation is not false is wrong. sent13: the fact that something is androgenic but not wholesome is false if it does channelize. sent14: if the road is a hall the fact that it is a Richmond that brazens does not hold. sent15: there is something such that if it is unforgettable it is a bogey and it does not brazen. sent16: there is something such that if it is not non-Mandaean then it does multiply Isere and does not multiply mph. sent17: if the lumen is a kind of a Thessalonian it is scalar and it does not bogey. sent18: that the lumen is a kind of a anestrus that is a lanai is not right if it is a Rossini. sent19: that the cyberart is a kind of a harpsichordist but it is not unforgettable is not correct if it is filar.
sent4 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it does channelize then that it is androgenic and it is not wholesome is not correct.
sent13 -> int1: the fact that the put-put is androgenic but it is not wholesome is incorrect if it channelizes.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if that it is unforgettable is correct then the fact that it is both a bogey and not brazen is not true is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the fact that the lumen is erect but not a dinosaur does not hold is true if it is unpronounceable. sent2: that the lumen is a plaza and is a trilobite is false if it is eugenic. sent3: if the metaproterenol incarnates the fact that it is casuistic and it is ascensional is not right. sent4: if the lumen is unforgettable the fact that it bogeys and it is not brazen is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if it is ascensional that it does multiply heartland and is a double-prop is incorrect. sent6: that that the lumen is unforgettable and a Neohygrophorus is not true is not wrong if it is resistible. sent7: the bulbil does collogue but it is not hydrophobic if it is a Rossini. sent8: if the lumen is unforgettable the fact that it is a kind of a bogey that brazens is incorrect. sent9: that the lumen is a ghrelin and does not brazen is not false if it multiplies babu. sent10: if the shipside does patronage bulbil the fact that it is geodetic and ascensional is not right. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a table that it is monumental and it is not unwholesome does not hold. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a tragopan that that it does wreathe and is a kind of an implantation is not false is wrong. sent13: the fact that something is androgenic but not wholesome is false if it does channelize. sent14: if the road is a hall the fact that it is a Richmond that brazens does not hold. sent15: there is something such that if it is unforgettable it is a bogey and it does not brazen. sent16: there is something such that if it is not non-Mandaean then it does multiply Isere and does not multiply mph. sent17: if the lumen is a kind of a Thessalonian it is scalar and it does not bogey. sent18: that the lumen is a kind of a anestrus that is a lanai is not right if it is a Rossini. sent19: that the cyberart is a kind of a harpsichordist but it is not unforgettable is not correct if it is filar. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__