that there is something such that if it expands the fact that it is a kind of an animal and it does not multiply Chavez is false is not right.
sent1: if the avenue is epigastric the fact that it overreaches and is non-passionate is not right. sent2: the fact that the avenue is a kind of an animal that does not multiply Chavez does not hold if it expands. sent3: the fact that the podocarp is a conduction but it does not poultice ICBM is not true if it does multiply Chavez. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a double-bogey the fact that it is not emotional and it is not a kind of a awayness is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a Mayenne hold then the fact that it is concentric and is non-caecilian is not true. sent6: if the avenue expands it is a kind of an animal that does not multiply Chavez. sent7: there exists something such that if it expands it is an animal and it does not multiply Chavez. sent8: the fact that the iceman is an avenue that does not refund is false if it multiplies Chavez. sent9: if the avenue expands that it is a scanner and does not patronage stater is false. sent10: there is something such that if it is bidirectional the fact that it is both a Scriabin and not algorithmic does not hold. sent11: that the avenue does multiply Chavez but it is not epigastric does not hold if it poultices Callistephus. sent12: if the avenue multiplies soapbox the fact that it is aerodynamic and does not expand is false. sent13: if the avenue does expand then that it is both a fashion and not a polyploid is incorrect. sent14: the fact that something is both nonrepetitive and not a chutney is incorrect if it multiplies gynecocracy. sent15: if the avenue multiplies Dawson that it is an animal but not nonrepetitive does not hold. sent16: there is something such that if the fact that it does poultice Nilotic hold then the fact that it does gauge and it is not salable does not hold. sent17: the fact that there is something such that if it expands that it is an animal and it does multiply Chavez is false is not false. sent18: that the avenue is a kind of an animal and it does multiply Chavez is wrong if it does expand.
sent2 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it multiplies gynecocracy the fact that it is nonrepetitive and it is not a chutney is not true.
sent14 -> int1: that the stoner is nonrepetitive and not a chutney is false if the fact that it multiplies gynecocracy is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it expands the fact that it is a kind of an animal and it does not multiply Chavez is false is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the avenue is epigastric the fact that it overreaches and is non-passionate is not right. sent2: the fact that the avenue is a kind of an animal that does not multiply Chavez does not hold if it expands. sent3: the fact that the podocarp is a conduction but it does not poultice ICBM is not true if it does multiply Chavez. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a double-bogey the fact that it is not emotional and it is not a kind of a awayness is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a Mayenne hold then the fact that it is concentric and is non-caecilian is not true. sent6: if the avenue expands it is a kind of an animal that does not multiply Chavez. sent7: there exists something such that if it expands it is an animal and it does not multiply Chavez. sent8: the fact that the iceman is an avenue that does not refund is false if it multiplies Chavez. sent9: if the avenue expands that it is a scanner and does not patronage stater is false. sent10: there is something such that if it is bidirectional the fact that it is both a Scriabin and not algorithmic does not hold. sent11: that the avenue does multiply Chavez but it is not epigastric does not hold if it poultices Callistephus. sent12: if the avenue multiplies soapbox the fact that it is aerodynamic and does not expand is false. sent13: if the avenue does expand then that it is both a fashion and not a polyploid is incorrect. sent14: the fact that something is both nonrepetitive and not a chutney is incorrect if it multiplies gynecocracy. sent15: if the avenue multiplies Dawson that it is an animal but not nonrepetitive does not hold. sent16: there is something such that if the fact that it does poultice Nilotic hold then the fact that it does gauge and it is not salable does not hold. sent17: the fact that there is something such that if it expands that it is an animal and it does multiply Chavez is false is not false. sent18: that the avenue is a kind of an animal and it does multiply Chavez is wrong if it does expand. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__