that there exists something such that if it is not impenetrable that it does chance absorption and it is a kind of a superannuation is false is not correct.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is penetrable it chances absorption and it is a superannuation. sent2: the fact that the sgraffito chances absorption and it is a superannuation is not correct if it is impenetrable. sent3: the fact that something does chance absorption and is a superannuation is not right if the fact that it is impenetrable is right. sent4: something does chance absorption and is a kind of a superannuation if it is not impenetrable. sent5: if the fact that something is not impenetrable is correct that the fact that it chances absorption and it is a superannuation is not false is not true. sent6: if the sgraffito assails helpmate then that it does incriminate embolus and it is a shy is wrong. sent7: that something does incriminate midst and repudiates is not true if it does not assail pheniramine. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a raggedness is true then that it does assail revolutionism and it is a kind of a shy is not correct. sent9: if the sgraffito is not a librarian then the fact that it chances absorption and is a Faraday is wrong. sent10: if something does not incriminate midst it does page omniscience and it does animate. sent11: there exists something such that if the fact that it is impenetrable hold that it does chance absorption and is a superannuation does not hold. sent12: the sgraffito chances absorption and is a superannuation if it is not impenetrable. sent13: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not plantal hold that it is a jumper and it assails sgraffito is false.
sent5 -> int1: if the sgraffito is not impenetrable that it chances absorption and it is a superannuation is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is not impenetrable that it does chance absorption and it is a kind of a superannuation is false is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is penetrable it chances absorption and it is a superannuation. sent2: the fact that the sgraffito chances absorption and it is a superannuation is not correct if it is impenetrable. sent3: the fact that something does chance absorption and is a superannuation is not right if the fact that it is impenetrable is right. sent4: something does chance absorption and is a kind of a superannuation if it is not impenetrable. sent5: if the fact that something is not impenetrable is correct that the fact that it chances absorption and it is a superannuation is not false is not true. sent6: if the sgraffito assails helpmate then that it does incriminate embolus and it is a shy is wrong. sent7: that something does incriminate midst and repudiates is not true if it does not assail pheniramine. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a raggedness is true then that it does assail revolutionism and it is a kind of a shy is not correct. sent9: if the sgraffito is not a librarian then the fact that it chances absorption and is a Faraday is wrong. sent10: if something does not incriminate midst it does page omniscience and it does animate. sent11: there exists something such that if the fact that it is impenetrable hold that it does chance absorption and is a superannuation does not hold. sent12: the sgraffito chances absorption and is a superannuation if it is not impenetrable. sent13: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not plantal hold that it is a jumper and it assails sgraffito is false. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: if the sgraffito is not impenetrable that it chances absorption and it is a superannuation is false.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__