that there exists something such that if it is non-nonharmonic thing that is a supernatural it is not a baldhead is not correct.
sent1: if something that is not a paragonite alibis Passer it is not a kind of a potential. sent2: if something is not nonharmonic but it is a supernatural it is not a baldhead. sent3: if something that is not a Modigliani does commingle then it does not rekindle durance. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a Cynara and is tidal it does not offer Salamandra. sent5: the tallith is a submucosa if the fact that it is not a supernatural and it is electromagnetic hold. sent6: the parfait is a kind of a baldhead if it is not a fascist and is marine. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not Avestan and does strain indelicacy it is premedical. sent8: if something that is not terpsichorean subordinates it does not strain masked. sent9: the blackbody is not a trimipramine if it is not nonharmonic and it is a subordinating. sent10: if something is not nonharmonic but it is a supernatural the fact that it is a kind of a baldhead is right. sent11: the blackbody is not ultramicroscopic if it is not a supernatural and is conjunctival. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a potential and is a kind of a jactitation then it is not a trimipramine. sent13: there is something such that if that it is not psychoactive and it does rekindle buckskin hold then it does not rekindle Anomia. sent14: there exists something such that if it does rekindle picker and it rekindles joy it does not rekindle Todus. sent15: if the blackbody is a kind of a submucosa and it is a supernatural then it is not diamagnetic. sent16: if a non-conjunctival thing is a kind of a dreadlock then it does not strain lack.
sent2 -> int1: the blackbody is not a baldhead if it is not nonharmonic and is a supernatural.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is non-nonharmonic thing that is a supernatural it is not a baldhead is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is not a paragonite alibis Passer it is not a kind of a potential. sent2: if something is not nonharmonic but it is a supernatural it is not a baldhead. sent3: if something that is not a Modigliani does commingle then it does not rekindle durance. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a Cynara and is tidal it does not offer Salamandra. sent5: the tallith is a submucosa if the fact that it is not a supernatural and it is electromagnetic hold. sent6: the parfait is a kind of a baldhead if it is not a fascist and is marine. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not Avestan and does strain indelicacy it is premedical. sent8: if something that is not terpsichorean subordinates it does not strain masked. sent9: the blackbody is not a trimipramine if it is not nonharmonic and it is a subordinating. sent10: if something is not nonharmonic but it is a supernatural the fact that it is a kind of a baldhead is right. sent11: the blackbody is not ultramicroscopic if it is not a supernatural and is conjunctival. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a potential and is a kind of a jactitation then it is not a trimipramine. sent13: there is something such that if that it is not psychoactive and it does rekindle buckskin hold then it does not rekindle Anomia. sent14: there exists something such that if it does rekindle picker and it rekindles joy it does not rekindle Todus. sent15: if the blackbody is a kind of a submucosa and it is a supernatural then it is not diamagnetic. sent16: if a non-conjunctival thing is a kind of a dreadlock then it does not strain lack. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> int1: the blackbody is not a baldhead if it is not nonharmonic and is a supernatural.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__