the fact that there exists something such that if it is a viomycin and falsifies Phalangiidae it is not tartaric is not right.
sent1: if the radiopharmaceutical is a viomycin and it tolerates then it does unveil easing. sent2: something that is a viomycin and a reaction does not date removal. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is cooperative and does date Lutheranism is correct it is not a histidine. sent4: if the tidbit gang-rapes and spangles then it is tartaric. sent5: something is not tartaric if it is unstoppable thing that does unveil easing. sent6: there exists something such that if it does date storage and it does falsify Worcestershire then the fact that it is not agrologic is not wrong. sent7: if the brier is a viomycin and falsifies Phalangiidae then it is not tartaric. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a faced and does drill then it is not a kind of a Apollinaire. sent9: there is something such that if it does stomach and it does unveil herbivore it does not date touched. sent10: if the brier is a kind of a viomycin and it does falsify Phalangiidae it is tartaric. sent11: there is something such that if it is a viomycin that does falsify Phalangiidae then the fact that it is tartaric is true.
sent7 -> hypothesis;
if the herbivore is a viomycin that is a reaction the fact that it does not date removal is correct.
sent2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a viomycin and falsifies Phalangiidae it is not tartaric is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the radiopharmaceutical is a viomycin and it tolerates then it does unveil easing. sent2: something that is a viomycin and a reaction does not date removal. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is cooperative and does date Lutheranism is correct it is not a histidine. sent4: if the tidbit gang-rapes and spangles then it is tartaric. sent5: something is not tartaric if it is unstoppable thing that does unveil easing. sent6: there exists something such that if it does date storage and it does falsify Worcestershire then the fact that it is not agrologic is not wrong. sent7: if the brier is a viomycin and falsifies Phalangiidae then it is not tartaric. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a faced and does drill then it is not a kind of a Apollinaire. sent9: there is something such that if it does stomach and it does unveil herbivore it does not date touched. sent10: if the brier is a kind of a viomycin and it does falsify Phalangiidae it is tartaric. sent11: there is something such that if it is a viomycin that does falsify Phalangiidae then the fact that it is tartaric is true. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__