that there is something such that if the fact that it does not resume and it is not a kind of a Mayer does not hold then it is esophageal is false.
sent1: there exists something such that if it does resume it is esophageal. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it resumes and is not a kind of a Mayer is not correct the fact that it is esophageal is not false. sent3: if that the stannite does not resume and is not a Mayer is not right that it is not non-esophageal is right. sent4: if the fact that something is a kind of non-esophageal thing that does not unveil prettiness is not right it is a Lazarus. sent5: if the stannite does not resume and is not a Mayer then it is esophageal. sent6: there is something such that if that it does not resume and it is a Mayer does not hold it is esophageal. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a Mayer then it is esophageal. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not utter disguise and it does not dip does not hold then it is a kind of a polyptoton. sent9: that the stannite is esophageal is not wrong if it is a Mayer. sent10: there is something such that if it does not resume and it is not a Mayer then it is esophageal. sent11: if that the stannite does resume and is not a Mayer is incorrect it is esophageal.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
that the stannite is a Lazarus is not false if the fact that it is non-esophageal and it does not unveil prettiness is wrong.
sent4 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it does not resume and it is not a kind of a Mayer does not hold then it is esophageal is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does resume it is esophageal. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it resumes and is not a kind of a Mayer is not correct the fact that it is esophageal is not false. sent3: if that the stannite does not resume and is not a Mayer is not right that it is not non-esophageal is right. sent4: if the fact that something is a kind of non-esophageal thing that does not unveil prettiness is not right it is a Lazarus. sent5: if the stannite does not resume and is not a Mayer then it is esophageal. sent6: there is something such that if that it does not resume and it is a Mayer does not hold it is esophageal. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a Mayer then it is esophageal. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not utter disguise and it does not dip does not hold then it is a kind of a polyptoton. sent9: that the stannite is esophageal is not wrong if it is a Mayer. sent10: there is something such that if it does not resume and it is not a Mayer then it is esophageal. sent11: if that the stannite does resume and is not a Mayer is incorrect it is esophageal. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__