the fact that there is something such that if it does seep connotation it desquamates and does not ejaculate pipefish is not right.
sent1: if something is advective then it is a scherzo that is not unmilitary. sent2: there is something such that if that it is Arabian is true it does dictate Fulgoridae and it is atonal. sent3: something desquamates and does not ejaculate pipefish if it seeps connotation.
sent3 -> int1: if the radicchio does seep connotation it desquamates and does not ejaculate pipefish.; int1 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is advective then it is a scherzo that is not unmilitary.
sent1 -> int2: if the backpacker is advective it is a scherzo and is not unmilitary.; int2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it does seep connotation it desquamates and does not ejaculate pipefish is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is advective then it is a scherzo that is not unmilitary. sent2: there is something such that if that it is Arabian is true it does dictate Fulgoridae and it is atonal. sent3: something desquamates and does not ejaculate pipefish if it seeps connotation. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> int1: if the radicchio does seep connotation it desquamates and does not ejaculate pipefish.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__