that there is something such that if that it is not a tamp and/or it is seminal is wrong then it is a Rain-giver is not correct.
sent1: there exists something such that if it does not guggle vulcanite or it does leap Toulon or both then it is a doxepin. sent2: the pabulum is reliable if the fact that it is not a kind of an open and/or it does tamp is not right. sent3: if the snowboard is not a kind of a tamp and/or it is not non-seminal then it is a Rain-giver. sent4: there exists something such that if that either it is not nonfunctional or it predestines Desmodontidae or both is false then it is a Roswell. sent5: if that that the snowboard either is not a chorion or is a bombproof or both is correct does not hold then it is a Rain-giver. sent6: the belching is a kind of a Rain-giver if the fact that it either does not dangle utensil or is a intractability or both is not right. sent7: if the fact that either the snowboard is not a tamp or it is seminal or both is not true it is a Rain-giver. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that either it is not a screwdriver or it is reliable or both does not hold it is fearful. sent9: if the fact that something is not reliable and/or predestines con is not right it is a Wain. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it tamps and/or it is seminal is wrong then it is a kind of a Rain-giver. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a tamp and/or it is seminal it is a Rain-giver. sent12: if the fact that the snowboard is either a tamp or seminal or both is wrong it is a Rain-giver. sent13: the snowboard does tamp if the fact that it is not a contract or diffident or both does not hold. sent14: if the fact that the snowboard is not non-field-crop and/or does leap linendraper is wrong then it is a cumulonimbus. sent15: there exists something such that if that either it is not a pension or it is fearful or both is not correct then that it is autographic is not false.
sent7 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if the fact that it is not reliable or it does predestine con or both is false then it is a Wain.
sent9 -> int1: if that either the vulcanite is not reliable or it does predestine con or both is not right it is a Wain.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if that it is not a tamp and/or it is seminal is wrong then it is a Rain-giver is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does not guggle vulcanite or it does leap Toulon or both then it is a doxepin. sent2: the pabulum is reliable if the fact that it is not a kind of an open and/or it does tamp is not right. sent3: if the snowboard is not a kind of a tamp and/or it is not non-seminal then it is a Rain-giver. sent4: there exists something such that if that either it is not nonfunctional or it predestines Desmodontidae or both is false then it is a Roswell. sent5: if that that the snowboard either is not a chorion or is a bombproof or both is correct does not hold then it is a Rain-giver. sent6: the belching is a kind of a Rain-giver if the fact that it either does not dangle utensil or is a intractability or both is not right. sent7: if the fact that either the snowboard is not a tamp or it is seminal or both is not true it is a Rain-giver. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that either it is not a screwdriver or it is reliable or both does not hold it is fearful. sent9: if the fact that something is not reliable and/or predestines con is not right it is a Wain. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it tamps and/or it is seminal is wrong then it is a kind of a Rain-giver. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a tamp and/or it is seminal it is a Rain-giver. sent12: if the fact that the snowboard is either a tamp or seminal or both is wrong it is a Rain-giver. sent13: the snowboard does tamp if the fact that it is not a contract or diffident or both does not hold. sent14: if the fact that the snowboard is not non-field-crop and/or does leap linendraper is wrong then it is a cumulonimbus. sent15: there exists something such that if that either it is not a pension or it is fearful or both is not correct then that it is autographic is not false. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__