that there exists something such that if it stands it is a kind of inedible thing that does not complect cracker is wrong.
sent1: the bilges is non-edible thing that complects cracker if it is a stand. sent2: that there is something such that if it stands it is not edible hold. sent3: something does not complect Wolf and it does not sweeten if it complects cracker. sent4: there exists something such that if it is useless it is not quiet and is specialistic. sent5: the fact that the bilges is not edible and it does not complect cracker is right if that it stands is not false. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a stand then it does not complect cracker.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
if the Trinidadian complects cracker it does not complect Wolf and it does not sweeten.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it stands it is a kind of inedible thing that does not complect cracker is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the bilges is non-edible thing that complects cracker if it is a stand. sent2: that there is something such that if it stands it is not edible hold. sent3: something does not complect Wolf and it does not sweeten if it complects cracker. sent4: there exists something such that if it is useless it is not quiet and is specialistic. sent5: the fact that the bilges is not edible and it does not complect cracker is right if that it stands is not false. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a stand then it does not complect cracker. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__