there is something such that if it drones Appalachia and it is not shallow-draft then it is not pharmacological.
sent1: there exists something such that if it drones Appalachia and it is shallow-draft then it is not pharmacological. sent2: there is something such that if it does drone Appalachia and it is not shallow-draft then it is pharmacological. sent3: if the rooting does drone Appalachia but it is not shallow-draft then it is not pharmacological. sent4: if something that is a shipping does not contribute biohazard then it is not pyrotechnic. sent5: if the rooting does drone Appalachia and is shallow-draft it is not pharmacological.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is a shipping that does not contribute biohazard then it is not pyrotechnic.
sent4 -> int1: if the allocator does ship but it does not contribute biohazard then it is not pyrotechnic.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it drones Appalachia and it is not shallow-draft then it is not pharmacological. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it drones Appalachia and it is shallow-draft then it is not pharmacological. sent2: there is something such that if it does drone Appalachia and it is not shallow-draft then it is pharmacological. sent3: if the rooting does drone Appalachia but it is not shallow-draft then it is not pharmacological. sent4: if something that is a shipping does not contribute biohazard then it is not pyrotechnic. sent5: if the rooting does drone Appalachia and is shallow-draft it is not pharmacological. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__