the fact that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Mao and is not unlawful it is non-electrocardiographic does not hold.
sent1: if the perineurium is not medullary but it is unlawful then it is not a Inca. sent2: there is something such that if it is non-closed-circuit thing that does skitter it is not a banteng. sent3: if the apodeme is not a guillemot and it is not unlawful it gladdens. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not deviate unperceptiveness and it is acyclic the fact that it does not riot paranoia is not incorrect. sent5: if the perineurium is not a kind of a Mao and is not unlawful it is not electrocardiographic. sent6: the perineurium is not amenorrheic if it is not unlawful and is medullary. sent7: if something that does not riot drey does not duck it is not incurious. sent8: if the vespid is not Altaic and not electrocardiographic then it is a glyceraldehyde. sent9: that if the perineurium does not disobey but it is cambial then the perineurium is not incurious is not false. sent10: the perineurium is a pollster if it is not electrocardiographic and it does not deviate originality. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Mao and it is unlawful it is not electrocardiographic. sent12: there is something such that if it does not brazen and it is not a kind of an inadequacy then it does riot lots.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if it does not riot drey and does not duck then it is not incurious.
sent7 -> int1: the fact that the ribgrass is not incurious is right if it does not riot drey and it is not a duck.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Mao and is not unlawful it is non-electrocardiographic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the perineurium is not medullary but it is unlawful then it is not a Inca. sent2: there is something such that if it is non-closed-circuit thing that does skitter it is not a banteng. sent3: if the apodeme is not a guillemot and it is not unlawful it gladdens. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not deviate unperceptiveness and it is acyclic the fact that it does not riot paranoia is not incorrect. sent5: if the perineurium is not a kind of a Mao and is not unlawful it is not electrocardiographic. sent6: the perineurium is not amenorrheic if it is not unlawful and is medullary. sent7: if something that does not riot drey does not duck it is not incurious. sent8: if the vespid is not Altaic and not electrocardiographic then it is a glyceraldehyde. sent9: that if the perineurium does not disobey but it is cambial then the perineurium is not incurious is not false. sent10: the perineurium is a pollster if it is not electrocardiographic and it does not deviate originality. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Mao and it is unlawful it is not electrocardiographic. sent12: there is something such that if it does not brazen and it is not a kind of an inadequacy then it does riot lots. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__