the fact that there exists something such that if it is not indehiscent the fact that it does not compound and it is geographic is incorrect is not correct.
sent1: that something is not phrenic but it is a treated hold if it does not look semanticist. sent2: there is something such that if it does not interpolate brasserie then the fact that it is non-Jamaican thing that is pediatric is not right. sent3: the fact that something is not a kind of a Timgad but it is substantive is wrong if it is a petrel. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an elater then it is not a bracelet and does look Bizet. sent5: there is something such that if it is not indehiscent then the fact that it does compound and is geographic is not correct. sent6: that something is not compound and is geographic is not true if it is not indehiscent. sent7: there is something such that if that it is not a Sennett hold then the fact that the fact that it is not toxic and does dice is correct is not correct. sent8: if something is a Serra that it does not interpolate tuft and it does permit Latinism does not hold. sent9: that the tuft is not a kind of a compound but it is geographic is wrong if it is indehiscent. sent10: if the bluethroat does not permit crankcase then that it is a Cicadidae and it is indehiscent is not right. sent11: if the harmattan is canonic then the fact that it is non-shorts and compound does not hold. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a pantheist that it is anthropocentric and it does twin does not hold.
sent6 -> int1: if the tuft is not indehiscent then the fact that it is a kind of non-compound thing that is geographic does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not indehiscent the fact that it does not compound and it is geographic is incorrect is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is not phrenic but it is a treated hold if it does not look semanticist. sent2: there is something such that if it does not interpolate brasserie then the fact that it is non-Jamaican thing that is pediatric is not right. sent3: the fact that something is not a kind of a Timgad but it is substantive is wrong if it is a petrel. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an elater then it is not a bracelet and does look Bizet. sent5: there is something such that if it is not indehiscent then the fact that it does compound and is geographic is not correct. sent6: that something is not compound and is geographic is not true if it is not indehiscent. sent7: there is something such that if that it is not a Sennett hold then the fact that the fact that it is not toxic and does dice is correct is not correct. sent8: if something is a Serra that it does not interpolate tuft and it does permit Latinism does not hold. sent9: that the tuft is not a kind of a compound but it is geographic is wrong if it is indehiscent. sent10: if the bluethroat does not permit crankcase then that it is a Cicadidae and it is indehiscent is not right. sent11: if the harmattan is canonic then the fact that it is non-shorts and compound does not hold. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a pantheist that it is anthropocentric and it does twin does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: if the tuft is not indehiscent then the fact that it is a kind of non-compound thing that is geographic does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__