the guerrilla does case erethism and does not case insurer.
sent1: the guerrilla cases erethism but it does not case insurer if it is not a juxtaposition. sent2: that something is not a perniciousness and is a juxtaposition is incorrect if it is a novelist. sent3: the guerrilla is not a juxtaposition. sent4: if there is something such that that it is not postnatal and/or it is ergotic does not hold then the guerrilla is a English. sent5: if something is English then it turfs one-ninth. sent6: that the hospital is not postnatal or it is ergotic or both is incorrect. sent7: if something does turf one-ninth it is a novelist. sent8: the fact that something cases erethism and does not case insurer is not true if it is a kind of a juxtaposition.
sent1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;
that the guerrilla does case erethism but it does not case insurer is incorrect.
sent8 -> int1: if the guerrilla is a juxtaposition then the fact that it does case erethism and it does not case insurer is false.;
$hypothesis$ = the guerrilla does case erethism and does not case insurer. ; $context$ = sent1: the guerrilla cases erethism but it does not case insurer if it is not a juxtaposition. sent2: that something is not a perniciousness and is a juxtaposition is incorrect if it is a novelist. sent3: the guerrilla is not a juxtaposition. sent4: if there is something such that that it is not postnatal and/or it is ergotic does not hold then the guerrilla is a English. sent5: if something is English then it turfs one-ninth. sent6: that the hospital is not postnatal or it is ergotic or both is incorrect. sent7: if something does turf one-ninth it is a novelist. sent8: the fact that something cases erethism and does not case insurer is not true if it is a kind of a juxtaposition. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__