there is something such that if that it is both not nonarboreal and not nonphotosynthetic is wrong the fact that it is a dot-com is right.
sent1: if the mixer is arboreal but it is not nonphotosynthetic it is a dot-com. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Avestan then it subscribes. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is both trivalent and not a decantation does not hold it is a kind of a meninx. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is arboreal thing that is nonphotosynthetic does not hold then it is a kind of a dot-com. sent5: there is something such that if it is arboreal and not nonphotosynthetic it is a kind of a dot-com. sent6: the mixer is a kind of a dot-com if it is nonphotosynthetic. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is nonphotosynthetic is not incorrect it is a dot-com. sent8: the mixer is surficial if that it is a shedder and not a coydog is not correct. sent9: if the mixer is a kind of a Dubrovnik but it is not a brocade then it is nonphotosynthetic. sent10: there is something such that if that it is incidental thing that does shore Jansen does not hold it does billow schematic. sent11: the fact that the mixer is dot-com is right if that it is arboreal but not nonphotosynthetic is false. sent12: if that something is fundamentalist but it does not outgeneral progestin is wrong then it is a thunderstorm. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not arboreal then it is dot-com.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if that it is a fundamentalist and does not outgeneral progestin is not right the fact that it is a thunderstorm is correct.
sent12 -> int1: if that the taxman is a fundamentalist and does not outgeneral progestin is not right then it is a thunderstorm.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it is both not nonarboreal and not nonphotosynthetic is wrong the fact that it is a dot-com is right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the mixer is arboreal but it is not nonphotosynthetic it is a dot-com. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Avestan then it subscribes. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is both trivalent and not a decantation does not hold it is a kind of a meninx. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is arboreal thing that is nonphotosynthetic does not hold then it is a kind of a dot-com. sent5: there is something such that if it is arboreal and not nonphotosynthetic it is a kind of a dot-com. sent6: the mixer is a kind of a dot-com if it is nonphotosynthetic. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is nonphotosynthetic is not incorrect it is a dot-com. sent8: the mixer is surficial if that it is a shedder and not a coydog is not correct. sent9: if the mixer is a kind of a Dubrovnik but it is not a brocade then it is nonphotosynthetic. sent10: there is something such that if that it is incidental thing that does shore Jansen does not hold it does billow schematic. sent11: the fact that the mixer is dot-com is right if that it is arboreal but not nonphotosynthetic is false. sent12: if that something is fundamentalist but it does not outgeneral progestin is wrong then it is a thunderstorm. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not arboreal then it is dot-com. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__