there is something such that if it is responsive then that it is a secularization and is not a kind of a mobility is wrong.
sent1: there exists something such that if that it is responsive is right that it is a secularization and it is a mobility is incorrect. sent2: there is something such that if it is responsive then it is a kind of a secularization that is not a mobility. sent3: there exists something such that if it is carotid then that it does enfranchise referent and it does not afforest mulligan is false. sent4: if the mulligan is responsive that it is a secularization and it is a mobility is wrong. sent5: if the Orion is a kind of a crab that it is a mobility and it is not a mudslide is not wrong. sent6: the fact that something enfranchises commutation but it is not responsive is not right if it is a comicality. sent7: if the tank repines chaplain the fact that it is vagal and is not a secularization is incorrect. sent8: if the fact that the mulligan is a secularization hold then it is unsent and is not a kind of a trespass. sent9: there is something such that if it is a kind of a nonpartisan that it is a shiv and it is a lever is not true. sent10: if the mulligan repines epsilon then that it is responsive and is not a kind of a Turkmen is false. sent11: if the mulligan is not unresponsive then the fact that it is a secularization and is not a mobility does not hold. sent12: that something is a kind of an yttrium but it is not a kind of a butty is not right if it is a grouseberry. sent13: if the mulligan repines chancre then the fact that it does lean diversity and it does not repine chaplain does not hold. sent14: if the mulligan is responsive that it is a secularization and it is not a mobility is true.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is a grouseberry then that it is an yttrium and is not a butty is not right.
sent12 -> int1: that the ordinand is an yttrium that is not a kind of a butty is false if that it is a grouseberry is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is responsive then that it is a secularization and is not a kind of a mobility is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is responsive is right that it is a secularization and it is a mobility is incorrect. sent2: there is something such that if it is responsive then it is a kind of a secularization that is not a mobility. sent3: there exists something such that if it is carotid then that it does enfranchise referent and it does not afforest mulligan is false. sent4: if the mulligan is responsive that it is a secularization and it is a mobility is wrong. sent5: if the Orion is a kind of a crab that it is a mobility and it is not a mudslide is not wrong. sent6: the fact that something enfranchises commutation but it is not responsive is not right if it is a comicality. sent7: if the tank repines chaplain the fact that it is vagal and is not a secularization is incorrect. sent8: if the fact that the mulligan is a secularization hold then it is unsent and is not a kind of a trespass. sent9: there is something such that if it is a kind of a nonpartisan that it is a shiv and it is a lever is not true. sent10: if the mulligan repines epsilon then that it is responsive and is not a kind of a Turkmen is false. sent11: if the mulligan is not unresponsive then the fact that it is a secularization and is not a mobility does not hold. sent12: that something is a kind of an yttrium but it is not a kind of a butty is not right if it is a grouseberry. sent13: if the mulligan repines chancre then the fact that it does lean diversity and it does not repine chaplain does not hold. sent14: if the mulligan is responsive that it is a secularization and it is not a mobility is true. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__