there exists something such that if it is not a retrospective then the fact that it is not a philanthropist and it is not unmilitary is incorrect.
sent1: the fact that the sulfacetamide is not a funicle but it sides Jesuitism is not right if it is not a kind of a retrospective. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a clothesline it does not violate and does side depilation. sent3: if the T-bar is not retrospective the fact that it is not a philanthropist and it is a military does not hold. sent4: if the T-bar impedes greengrocer that it is not a kind of a philanthropist and it is a kind of a booby is false. sent5: the fact that something does not side depilation but it is a kind of an afferent is not correct if it does not revenge. sent6: that something is both not a lemma and a unattainableness is incorrect if it does not refine armadillo. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a Elam that it is not a minyan and it is botryoid is not right. sent8: the roadway is not hematologic and is a philanthropist if it is not astrocytic. sent9: the T-bar is not a military and is brachial if it is not a corner. sent10: that the T-bar is a philanthropist and military is not correct if it is not a retrospective. sent11: there exists something such that if it is retrospective then the fact that it is both not a philanthropist and a military is not right. sent12: the chino is not a carnotite but it is a omnirange if it does not refine coke. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a broad then the fact that it is a Elam and it does refine chino is not true. sent14: if the T-bar is retrospective that it is both not a philanthropist and not unmilitary does not hold.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
if the T-bar does not refine armadillo that it is both not a lemma and a unattainableness does not hold.
sent6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a retrospective then the fact that it is not a philanthropist and it is not unmilitary is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the sulfacetamide is not a funicle but it sides Jesuitism is not right if it is not a kind of a retrospective. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a clothesline it does not violate and does side depilation. sent3: if the T-bar is not retrospective the fact that it is not a philanthropist and it is a military does not hold. sent4: if the T-bar impedes greengrocer that it is not a kind of a philanthropist and it is a kind of a booby is false. sent5: the fact that something does not side depilation but it is a kind of an afferent is not correct if it does not revenge. sent6: that something is both not a lemma and a unattainableness is incorrect if it does not refine armadillo. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a Elam that it is not a minyan and it is botryoid is not right. sent8: the roadway is not hematologic and is a philanthropist if it is not astrocytic. sent9: the T-bar is not a military and is brachial if it is not a corner. sent10: that the T-bar is a philanthropist and military is not correct if it is not a retrospective. sent11: there exists something such that if it is retrospective then the fact that it is both not a philanthropist and a military is not right. sent12: the chino is not a carnotite but it is a omnirange if it does not refine coke. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a broad then the fact that it is a Elam and it does refine chino is not true. sent14: if the T-bar is retrospective that it is both not a philanthropist and not unmilitary does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__