the fact that there is something such that if it is incomparable that the fact that it is not calendric and it is not anaphrodisiac is true is false is wrong.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is a tarot that it does not wend and is not a kind of a gimmickry does not hold. sent2: the fact that something is both not a mumbling and not a flypaper is not right if it is a kind of a greenshank. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a longitude the fact that it is not non-epizoan and not apoplectic is false. sent4: if that the ladylove is incomparable is not wrong then it is not calendric and it is not anaphrodisiac. sent5: if that the ladylove is incomparable is not wrong that it is a kind of non-calendric thing that is anaphrodisiac is false. sent6: there exists something such that if it is incomparable the fact that it is calendric but not anaphrodisiac is incorrect. sent7: there is something such that if it does deactivate ruck then that it is not angiocarpic and it does not convect is false. sent8: there exists something such that if it is incomparable the fact that it is both not calendric and anaphrodisiac is wrong. sent9: the fact that the fact that the walkie-talkie is not a becket and not the oriented is incorrect if the walkie-talkie is a goldbeater is not wrong. sent10: if the ladylove does confederate growler that it is non-calendric thing that is not a showroom does not hold. sent11: if something does declaw Dreyfus then that it is not anaphrodisiac and it is not a intercostal is not right. sent12: there is something such that if it is incomparable it is a kind of non-calendric thing that is not anaphrodisiac. sent13: if the ladylove is incomparable the fact that it is both not non-calendric and not anaphrodisiac is false. sent14: if the ladylove is incomparable then the fact that it is not calendric and it is not anaphrodisiac is false. sent15: there exists something such that if it is indestructible then that it is not a porte-cochere and it is not infectious is false. sent16: if something does foliate the fact that it is a kind of non-anaphrodisiac thing that does not confederate zootoxin is not correct. sent17: that the anatoxin is not a bedpost and it is not calendric does not hold if it is forehand. sent18: there is something such that if it does deactivate ladylove then the fact that it is indestructible and it is not a timecard is wrong.
sent14 -> hypothesis;
if the ladylove does declaw Dreyfus then the fact that it is not anaphrodisiac and it is not a kind of a intercostal is not right.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is incomparable that the fact that it is not calendric and it is not anaphrodisiac is true is false is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a tarot that it does not wend and is not a kind of a gimmickry does not hold. sent2: the fact that something is both not a mumbling and not a flypaper is not right if it is a kind of a greenshank. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a longitude the fact that it is not non-epizoan and not apoplectic is false. sent4: if that the ladylove is incomparable is not wrong then it is not calendric and it is not anaphrodisiac. sent5: if that the ladylove is incomparable is not wrong that it is a kind of non-calendric thing that is anaphrodisiac is false. sent6: there exists something such that if it is incomparable the fact that it is calendric but not anaphrodisiac is incorrect. sent7: there is something such that if it does deactivate ruck then that it is not angiocarpic and it does not convect is false. sent8: there exists something such that if it is incomparable the fact that it is both not calendric and anaphrodisiac is wrong. sent9: the fact that the fact that the walkie-talkie is not a becket and not the oriented is incorrect if the walkie-talkie is a goldbeater is not wrong. sent10: if the ladylove does confederate growler that it is non-calendric thing that is not a showroom does not hold. sent11: if something does declaw Dreyfus then that it is not anaphrodisiac and it is not a intercostal is not right. sent12: there is something such that if it is incomparable it is a kind of non-calendric thing that is not anaphrodisiac. sent13: if the ladylove is incomparable the fact that it is both not non-calendric and not anaphrodisiac is false. sent14: if the ladylove is incomparable then the fact that it is not calendric and it is not anaphrodisiac is false. sent15: there exists something such that if it is indestructible then that it is not a porte-cochere and it is not infectious is false. sent16: if something does foliate the fact that it is a kind of non-anaphrodisiac thing that does not confederate zootoxin is not correct. sent17: that the anatoxin is not a bedpost and it is not calendric does not hold if it is forehand. sent18: there is something such that if it does deactivate ladylove then the fact that it is indestructible and it is not a timecard is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__