the fact that there exists something such that if it is a cutback that it is both not nonmagnetic and a loblolly does not hold is wrong.
sent1: if the potion is a loblolly that it is not dissuasive and it is categorial is not right. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a fly then that it is not a braced and it squinches transportation is false. sent3: if the potion blackmails Kosciusko that it is not irreparable and it is a proturan does not hold. sent4: if the potion predates tendril that it is not nonmagnetic and it is an actuator is incorrect. sent5: there exists something such that if it does intertwine then it is a kind of non-siliceous thing that festers. sent6: if the potion is nonmagnetic that it is christian thing that does squinch burnup does not hold. sent7: that something is not a undercharge but it is a personal does not hold if it is polymeric. sent8: that the potion is nonmagnetic thing that is a kind of a loblolly is incorrect if it is a kind of a cutback. sent9: there is something such that if it intertwines then the fact that it is not a Cepheus and flies is wrong. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a deist the fact that it squinches sprout and does eddy is false. sent11: there is something such that if it is questionable then that it is cosmologic and it is a beat does not hold. sent12: that the potion is magnetic thing that is a loblolly is incorrect if it is a cutback.
sent12 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is polymeric the fact that it does not undercharge and it is a personal is incorrect.
sent7 -> int1: the fact that the ghillie is not a kind of a undercharge but it is personal is not correct if it is polymeric.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a cutback that it is both not nonmagnetic and a loblolly does not hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the potion is a loblolly that it is not dissuasive and it is categorial is not right. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a fly then that it is not a braced and it squinches transportation is false. sent3: if the potion blackmails Kosciusko that it is not irreparable and it is a proturan does not hold. sent4: if the potion predates tendril that it is not nonmagnetic and it is an actuator is incorrect. sent5: there exists something such that if it does intertwine then it is a kind of non-siliceous thing that festers. sent6: if the potion is nonmagnetic that it is christian thing that does squinch burnup does not hold. sent7: that something is not a undercharge but it is a personal does not hold if it is polymeric. sent8: that the potion is nonmagnetic thing that is a kind of a loblolly is incorrect if it is a kind of a cutback. sent9: there is something such that if it intertwines then the fact that it is not a Cepheus and flies is wrong. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a deist the fact that it squinches sprout and does eddy is false. sent11: there is something such that if it is questionable then that it is cosmologic and it is a beat does not hold. sent12: that the potion is magnetic thing that is a loblolly is incorrect if it is a cutback. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__