that there is something such that if it does not romanticize that it is not artless and it is not genuine is not correct is wrong.
sent1: the fact that the fact that something is non-informational and not a free is false if it does not abuse averageness hold. sent2: if the scrubland is not genuine that it is not a frosted and not unprovocative is false. sent3: if that the scrubland does romanticize is true then the fact that it is artful and it is not genuine is not correct. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a Haitian then that it does not press and it does not ladle hobbler does not hold. sent5: that the fact that the scrubland is both not artless and not genuine is false is not wrong if it does not romanticize. sent6: there exists something such that if it romanticizes that it is not artless and it is not genuine is not true. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not abuse subfamily then the fact that it does not abuse holocephalan and it is not a gametophore is not true. sent8: that the fact that the hassock does not forbid and it is not a brother does not hold is not false if it is not artless. sent9: the fact that the scrubland does not abuse hassock and is not artless does not hold if it is not a whiz. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not romanticize then the fact that it is not artless and is genuine does not hold. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a satori the fact that that it is not a kind of a gametophore and does not raise is true is not right. sent12: that the scrubland does not reseed and it does not abuse thereness is false if it does not romanticize. sent13: that the scrubland is not artless and is not genuine is right if it does not romanticize. sent14: that the hassock does not abuse Salvador and it is not unscholarly is not correct if it is not genuine. sent15: if the scrubland is not genuine then the fact that it does not abuse averageness and does not abuse holocephalan is false. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not romanticize then it is non-artless thing that is not genuine. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not hop Lolo then the fact that it is not fewer and it is not ceramic is not right. sent18: if the fact that the scrubland does not romanticize is not wrong then that it is artless thing that is not genuine is false. sent19: if the scrubland does not romanticize that it is not artless and is genuine is not true. sent20: the fact that the scrubland is non-genuine thing that does not ladle iconolatry is wrong if it is not sugarless. sent21: there exists something such that if it does not romanticize then that it is artless and it is not genuine is wrong.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if the fact that it does not abuse averageness hold then the fact that it is not informational and it is not free does not hold.
sent1 -> int1: that the arsenopyrite is not informational and not free is not true if it does not abuse averageness.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it does not romanticize that it is not artless and it is not genuine is not correct is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that something is non-informational and not a free is false if it does not abuse averageness hold. sent2: if the scrubland is not genuine that it is not a frosted and not unprovocative is false. sent3: if that the scrubland does romanticize is true then the fact that it is artful and it is not genuine is not correct. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a Haitian then that it does not press and it does not ladle hobbler does not hold. sent5: that the fact that the scrubland is both not artless and not genuine is false is not wrong if it does not romanticize. sent6: there exists something such that if it romanticizes that it is not artless and it is not genuine is not true. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not abuse subfamily then the fact that it does not abuse holocephalan and it is not a gametophore is not true. sent8: that the fact that the hassock does not forbid and it is not a brother does not hold is not false if it is not artless. sent9: the fact that the scrubland does not abuse hassock and is not artless does not hold if it is not a whiz. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not romanticize then the fact that it is not artless and is genuine does not hold. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a satori the fact that that it is not a kind of a gametophore and does not raise is true is not right. sent12: that the scrubland does not reseed and it does not abuse thereness is false if it does not romanticize. sent13: that the scrubland is not artless and is not genuine is right if it does not romanticize. sent14: that the hassock does not abuse Salvador and it is not unscholarly is not correct if it is not genuine. sent15: if the scrubland is not genuine then the fact that it does not abuse averageness and does not abuse holocephalan is false. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not romanticize then it is non-artless thing that is not genuine. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not hop Lolo then the fact that it is not fewer and it is not ceramic is not right. sent18: if the fact that the scrubland does not romanticize is not wrong then that it is artless thing that is not genuine is false. sent19: if the scrubland does not romanticize that it is not artless and is genuine is not true. sent20: the fact that the scrubland is non-genuine thing that does not ladle iconolatry is wrong if it is not sugarless. sent21: there exists something such that if it does not romanticize then that it is artless and it is not genuine is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__