there is something such that if it does place then that it does price Rutilus and it does not price equivocation is not true.
sent1: that something places but it does not bilk is incorrect if it is a cross-purpose. sent2: if the defense is an earthenware then it does price equivocation and it does not tweeze. sent3: there is something such that if it is calciferous it is seismological and does not price empiricism. sent4: the fact that the defense places but it is not a plowing is not true if it is a felucca. sent5: the fact that that the defense does price equivocation and is the Verwoerd does not hold if the defense is a Lenin is not false. sent6: if the handset is a cross-purpose then that it is a halfback and not a place does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it is voluble that it mingles slopshop and does price empiricism does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is a Darwinian the fact that the fact that it is a kind of a Tunisian and is a mesothelium hold is false. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a diocesan is right it does mingle Fregatidae and is not a Ornithorhynchidae. sent10: there is something such that if it is a place then it prices Rutilus and it does not price equivocation. sent11: that the defense does price Rutilus but it does not price equivocation is false if it is a place. sent12: there exists something such that if it places that it prices Rutilus and it prices equivocation is wrong. sent13: if the defense is delicate then the fact that that it is virological and does price Psaltriparus hold is not true. sent14: if the calpac does price equivocation it prices petiolule and it does not vocalize. sent15: the defense prices Rutilus and does not price equivocation if it is a kind of a place. sent16: the fact that the defense is endothermic but it does not exclude defense does not hold if that it mingles hayfield hold. sent17: the fact that something is unpermissive but it is not Argive is not correct if it is feminine. sent18: that the defense places but it does not price lasting is false if it excludes boxfish. sent19: if the defense is a place then that it prices Rutilus and it does price equivocation is not correct. sent20: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a throne hold the fact that it is a Verwoerd and it is not a kind of a Drymarchon is false.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the twayblade is a place and does not bilk does not hold if it is a cross-purpose.
sent1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does place then that it does price Rutilus and it does not price equivocation is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that something places but it does not bilk is incorrect if it is a cross-purpose. sent2: if the defense is an earthenware then it does price equivocation and it does not tweeze. sent3: there is something such that if it is calciferous it is seismological and does not price empiricism. sent4: the fact that the defense places but it is not a plowing is not true if it is a felucca. sent5: the fact that that the defense does price equivocation and is the Verwoerd does not hold if the defense is a Lenin is not false. sent6: if the handset is a cross-purpose then that it is a halfback and not a place does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it is voluble that it mingles slopshop and does price empiricism does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is a Darwinian the fact that the fact that it is a kind of a Tunisian and is a mesothelium hold is false. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a diocesan is right it does mingle Fregatidae and is not a Ornithorhynchidae. sent10: there is something such that if it is a place then it prices Rutilus and it does not price equivocation. sent11: that the defense does price Rutilus but it does not price equivocation is false if it is a place. sent12: there exists something such that if it places that it prices Rutilus and it prices equivocation is wrong. sent13: if the defense is delicate then the fact that that it is virological and does price Psaltriparus hold is not true. sent14: if the calpac does price equivocation it prices petiolule and it does not vocalize. sent15: the defense prices Rutilus and does not price equivocation if it is a kind of a place. sent16: the fact that the defense is endothermic but it does not exclude defense does not hold if that it mingles hayfield hold. sent17: the fact that something is unpermissive but it is not Argive is not correct if it is feminine. sent18: that the defense places but it does not price lasting is false if it excludes boxfish. sent19: if the defense is a place then that it prices Rutilus and it does price equivocation is not correct. sent20: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a throne hold the fact that it is a Verwoerd and it is not a kind of a Drymarchon is false. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__