there exists something such that if it is a shiv and it does corrode tailor it is not a pommy.
sent1: the lovastatin is not a pommy if it is a shiv and it corrodes tailor. sent2: the lovastatin is a capitalist if it is compatible and it corrodes tailor. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kalemia and it does dogmatize then the fact that it is not non-pathological is correct. sent4: there is something such that if it does corrode launderette and is Freudian it corrodes carboxyl. sent5: the lovastatin is not a dihybrid if it is many thing that is a pommy. sent6: if a neurasthenic is a shiv then it does not claw defecation. sent7: if the butacaine is a kind of a pommy and it does corrode carboxyl it is atrioventricular. sent8: if the lovastatin is a aye-aye and a dihybrid then it is not a psylla. sent9: there is something such that if it does Frenchify and it perorates then it does accumulate. sent10: if the lovastatin is a shiv and does corrode tailor then it is a pommy. sent11: that the lovastatin is not statistical if the lovastatin is a shiv and it claps wolf is not wrong. sent12: there is something such that if it is a kind of an interplay and it claws WNW then that it is a kind of a reorganization is not incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it corrodes escadrille and is a vintner it does not discontinue. sent14: there is something such that if it does exult ophthalmoscope and is a pangolin that it is not a versification is correct.
sent1 -> hypothesis;
if the wolf is a neurasthenic and it is a shiv it does not claw defecation.
sent6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a shiv and it does corrode tailor it is not a pommy. ; $context$ = sent1: the lovastatin is not a pommy if it is a shiv and it corrodes tailor. sent2: the lovastatin is a capitalist if it is compatible and it corrodes tailor. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kalemia and it does dogmatize then the fact that it is not non-pathological is correct. sent4: there is something such that if it does corrode launderette and is Freudian it corrodes carboxyl. sent5: the lovastatin is not a dihybrid if it is many thing that is a pommy. sent6: if a neurasthenic is a shiv then it does not claw defecation. sent7: if the butacaine is a kind of a pommy and it does corrode carboxyl it is atrioventricular. sent8: if the lovastatin is a aye-aye and a dihybrid then it is not a psylla. sent9: there is something such that if it does Frenchify and it perorates then it does accumulate. sent10: if the lovastatin is a shiv and does corrode tailor then it is a pommy. sent11: that the lovastatin is not statistical if the lovastatin is a shiv and it claps wolf is not wrong. sent12: there is something such that if it is a kind of an interplay and it claws WNW then that it is a kind of a reorganization is not incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it corrodes escadrille and is a vintner it does not discontinue. sent14: there is something such that if it does exult ophthalmoscope and is a pangolin that it is not a versification is correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__