there exists something such that if it is journalistic then that it is both not a pull and a binary is incorrect.
sent1: there exists something such that if it does blog then that it does not whistle cheval-de-frise and it is a wobbler is not correct. sent2: there is something such that if it is a kind of a vest then the fact that it is non-sarcolemmic thing that does smite epilogue does not hold. sent3: the fact that something is not a pull and is stenographic is not true if it is a Musset. sent4: if the peafowl is journalistic then that it does pull and it is binary is wrong. sent5: there is something such that if it is journalistic then it does not pull and it is binary. sent6: there exists something such that if it is journalistic the fact that it is a pull and it is a kind of a binary does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it is biochemical that it does not whistle crab and whistles footprint is false. sent8: that the peafowl is not binary but it is a kind of a curator is not correct if it does dream enormousness. sent9: if something is auxetic then that it does not smite dampener and is a bluecoat is wrong. sent10: the peafowl is both not a pull and binary if it is journalistic. sent11: if the peafowl is journalistic then the fact that it is not a kind of a pull and is binary does not hold.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if it is auxetic then the fact that it does not smite dampener and is a bluecoat does not hold.
sent9 -> int1: that the crab does not smite dampener and is a bluecoat is not true if it is auxetic.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is journalistic then that it is both not a pull and a binary is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does blog then that it does not whistle cheval-de-frise and it is a wobbler is not correct. sent2: there is something such that if it is a kind of a vest then the fact that it is non-sarcolemmic thing that does smite epilogue does not hold. sent3: the fact that something is not a pull and is stenographic is not true if it is a Musset. sent4: if the peafowl is journalistic then that it does pull and it is binary is wrong. sent5: there is something such that if it is journalistic then it does not pull and it is binary. sent6: there exists something such that if it is journalistic the fact that it is a pull and it is a kind of a binary does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it is biochemical that it does not whistle crab and whistles footprint is false. sent8: that the peafowl is not binary but it is a kind of a curator is not correct if it does dream enormousness. sent9: if something is auxetic then that it does not smite dampener and is a bluecoat is wrong. sent10: the peafowl is both not a pull and binary if it is journalistic. sent11: if the peafowl is journalistic then the fact that it is not a kind of a pull and is binary does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__