the fact that there is something such that if it is occlusive then that either it is not runic or it does not swim overplus or both is incorrect is incorrect.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is occlusive then that it is not runic and/or swims overplus is wrong. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it is occlusive hold then it either is not runic or does not swim overplus or both. sent3: the fact that the waiter is a Algonquian and/or does not pair TNT is not true if it is a Pollachius. sent4: if the fact that the waiter is a kind of a chunnel hold it either is not artifactual or does not supple syllabub or both. sent5: the waiter is runic if it is occlusive. sent6: there is something such that if it is occlusive then it swims overplus. sent7: there is something such that if it is occlusive it is runic. sent8: if something is a Java the fact that that either it is not a dauber or it does not swim overplus or both is right is false. sent9: that the waiter either is not runic or does not swim overplus or both does not hold if that it is occlusive is right. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not occlusive is not correct that it either is runic or does not swim overplus or both is not correct. sent11: if the waiter is occlusive then that the fact that it is not runic and/or it does swim overplus is true is false. sent12: if the waiter is occlusive then it is non-runic or it does not swim overplus or both. sent13: if the scapula is destructible the fact that either it is not a compassion or it is not asymptotic or both is not true. sent14: if the crottle is mathematical the fact that it is occlusive is not incorrect.
sent9 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the upstage is not a kind of a dauber and/or does not swim overplus is not true if it is a Java.
sent8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is occlusive then that either it is not runic or it does not swim overplus or both is incorrect is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is occlusive then that it is not runic and/or swims overplus is wrong. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it is occlusive hold then it either is not runic or does not swim overplus or both. sent3: the fact that the waiter is a Algonquian and/or does not pair TNT is not true if it is a Pollachius. sent4: if the fact that the waiter is a kind of a chunnel hold it either is not artifactual or does not supple syllabub or both. sent5: the waiter is runic if it is occlusive. sent6: there is something such that if it is occlusive then it swims overplus. sent7: there is something such that if it is occlusive it is runic. sent8: if something is a Java the fact that that either it is not a dauber or it does not swim overplus or both is right is false. sent9: that the waiter either is not runic or does not swim overplus or both does not hold if that it is occlusive is right. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not occlusive is not correct that it either is runic or does not swim overplus or both is not correct. sent11: if the waiter is occlusive then that the fact that it is not runic and/or it does swim overplus is true is false. sent12: if the waiter is occlusive then it is non-runic or it does not swim overplus or both. sent13: if the scapula is destructible the fact that either it is not a compassion or it is not asymptotic or both is not true. sent14: if the crottle is mathematical the fact that it is occlusive is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__