there exists something such that if it is nonastringent that it does not revoke and is a kind of a multitude does not hold.
sent1: there is something such that if it is a due then the fact that it does not evaporate and is a dermatoglyphics is wrong. sent2: that that the ski-plane is not Faustian but it is a panther is not incorrect is not right if it is a revoke. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Cooperstown then that it is not a Tanacetum and titrates is wrong. sent4: that the ski-plane is both not a revoke and a multitude does not hold if it is nonastringent. sent5: if the ski-plane does outgrow horseman the fact that it is not a revoke and it does outgrow morion is wrong. sent6: the fact that the ski-plane does not evaporate but it is a Othello is not right if it is nonastringent. sent7: if the fact that the ski-plane does outgrow teamwork hold that it is not a noticer and is legislative is false. sent8: the fact that the fact that the raceabout is not a tablecloth and outgrows tortuosity is incorrect is right if it is a revoke. sent9: if the ski-plane is a Garland the fact that it is non-nonclassical a protest is not true. sent10: the fact that the fact that something is both not nonastringent and a Garland hold is not correct if it is energetic. sent11: the ski-plane is not a revoke and is a multitude if it is nonastringent. sent12: there is something such that if it is nonastringent the fact that it does revoke and is a multitude is not correct. sent13: if the ski-plane is nonastringent then that it is a revoke and a multitude is incorrect. sent14: there exists something such that if it outgrows recission the fact that it is not a strontium and it is extragalactic is incorrect. sent15: the fact that the cerussite does not branch ape-man and does stick is incorrect if that it does not outgrow fleetness is false. sent16: the fact that that the ski-plane is not a multitude but it is an australopithecine is not correct hold if it is a sneak. sent17: that the ski-plane is not a kind of a revoke but it does branch Clotho is incorrect if it does dragoon. sent18: there is something such that if it tosses raceabout then the fact that it is not a kind of a Tanacetum and it is an outfitting is not true. sent19: there exists something such that if it is nonastringent then it is not a revoke and it is a multitude.
sent4 -> hypothesis;
if the ape-man is energetic then the fact that it is not nonastringent and it is a kind of a Garland is wrong.
sent10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is nonastringent that it does not revoke and is a kind of a multitude does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a due then the fact that it does not evaporate and is a dermatoglyphics is wrong. sent2: that that the ski-plane is not Faustian but it is a panther is not incorrect is not right if it is a revoke. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Cooperstown then that it is not a Tanacetum and titrates is wrong. sent4: that the ski-plane is both not a revoke and a multitude does not hold if it is nonastringent. sent5: if the ski-plane does outgrow horseman the fact that it is not a revoke and it does outgrow morion is wrong. sent6: the fact that the ski-plane does not evaporate but it is a Othello is not right if it is nonastringent. sent7: if the fact that the ski-plane does outgrow teamwork hold that it is not a noticer and is legislative is false. sent8: the fact that the fact that the raceabout is not a tablecloth and outgrows tortuosity is incorrect is right if it is a revoke. sent9: if the ski-plane is a Garland the fact that it is non-nonclassical a protest is not true. sent10: the fact that the fact that something is both not nonastringent and a Garland hold is not correct if it is energetic. sent11: the ski-plane is not a revoke and is a multitude if it is nonastringent. sent12: there is something such that if it is nonastringent the fact that it does revoke and is a multitude is not correct. sent13: if the ski-plane is nonastringent then that it is a revoke and a multitude is incorrect. sent14: there exists something such that if it outgrows recission the fact that it is not a strontium and it is extragalactic is incorrect. sent15: the fact that the cerussite does not branch ape-man and does stick is incorrect if that it does not outgrow fleetness is false. sent16: the fact that that the ski-plane is not a multitude but it is an australopithecine is not correct hold if it is a sneak. sent17: that the ski-plane is not a kind of a revoke but it does branch Clotho is incorrect if it does dragoon. sent18: there is something such that if it tosses raceabout then the fact that it is not a kind of a Tanacetum and it is an outfitting is not true. sent19: there exists something such that if it is nonastringent then it is not a revoke and it is a multitude. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__