there is something such that if it traffics complementation the fact that it does not traffic gunrunner and/or it is a kind of a periosteum does not hold.
sent1: that something either does not redirect OD or is a mission or both is wrong if it is biological. sent2: the fact that the fact that the adult is a periosteum and/or a rushlight does not hold is right if it is an inverse. sent3: if the hydromel does traffic complementation that it does not traffic gunrunner or it is a periosteum or both does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it does traffic complementation it is not a kind of a periosteum. sent5: the fact that the hydromel does traffic gunrunner and/or it is a kind of a periosteum is incorrect if that it traffics complementation is not wrong. sent6: there is something such that if it manacles it does not traffic Chichewa. sent7: if something traffics complementation that it is not a battledore and/or limps is wrong. sent8: there exists something such that if it is supernaturalist then the fact that either it estivates or it is proud or both is wrong. sent9: the hydromel is not a kind of a periosteum if it does traffic complementation. sent10: the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a caseworker it is bulbar hold. sent11: if the hydromel is a protist it does not traffic gunrunner. sent12: if the hydromel does traffic complementation then it does not traffic gunrunner and/or is a periosteum. sent13: there exists something such that if it traffics complementation it does not traffic gunrunner or is a periosteum or both.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
that the hydromel does not redirect OD or it is a mission or both is not right if it is not non-biological.
sent1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it traffics complementation the fact that it does not traffic gunrunner and/or it is a kind of a periosteum does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that something either does not redirect OD or is a mission or both is wrong if it is biological. sent2: the fact that the fact that the adult is a periosteum and/or a rushlight does not hold is right if it is an inverse. sent3: if the hydromel does traffic complementation that it does not traffic gunrunner or it is a periosteum or both does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it does traffic complementation it is not a kind of a periosteum. sent5: the fact that the hydromel does traffic gunrunner and/or it is a kind of a periosteum is incorrect if that it traffics complementation is not wrong. sent6: there is something such that if it manacles it does not traffic Chichewa. sent7: if something traffics complementation that it is not a battledore and/or limps is wrong. sent8: there exists something such that if it is supernaturalist then the fact that either it estivates or it is proud or both is wrong. sent9: the hydromel is not a kind of a periosteum if it does traffic complementation. sent10: the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a caseworker it is bulbar hold. sent11: if the hydromel is a protist it does not traffic gunrunner. sent12: if the hydromel does traffic complementation then it does not traffic gunrunner and/or is a periosteum. sent13: there exists something such that if it traffics complementation it does not traffic gunrunner or is a periosteum or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__