the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a loading then the fact that it is both not an oral and not real-time is not true does not hold.
sent1: if the blubber does load then the fact that it is not oral and not real-time does not hold. sent2: the fact that something does not heterodyne and it is not new is incorrect if it is non-real-time. sent3: if something is not indiscernible then that it is not a overachievement and it is not a ETA is false. sent4: if the blubber does not load then the fact that it is not a kind of an oral and it is not real-time is incorrect. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Florentine it does not torture clinocephaly and is not a silt. sent6: if the blubber is not a loading it is not a kind of an oral and it is not real-time.
sent4 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the thermopile is not a kind of a overachievement and it is not a ETA does not hold if that it is not indiscernible is not incorrect.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a loading then the fact that it is both not an oral and not real-time is not true does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the blubber does load then the fact that it is not oral and not real-time does not hold. sent2: the fact that something does not heterodyne and it is not new is incorrect if it is non-real-time. sent3: if something is not indiscernible then that it is not a overachievement and it is not a ETA is false. sent4: if the blubber does not load then the fact that it is not a kind of an oral and it is not real-time is incorrect. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Florentine it does not torture clinocephaly and is not a silt. sent6: if the blubber is not a loading it is not a kind of an oral and it is not real-time. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__