the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it does not disoblige biography is right it is not acaulescent is incorrect.
sent1: the counterglow is not acaulescent if it does not disoblige biography. sent2: there exists something such that if it is leafless then it is not assertive. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a suborder it is not an asshole. sent4: there is something such that if it is territorial then it does not disoblige crystallography. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a piano it does not variegate Sperry. sent6: if something does not green it is not unlivable. sent7: if the counterglow is not a Tunisian it disobliges biography. sent8: if the counterglow is a kind of a Ross it is not acaulescent. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a nominal it is not a dishonor. sent10: there exists something such that if it is non-infinitival it does gall weapon. sent11: if the seismograph is not acaulescent then the fact that it does not disoblige trigram hold. sent12: that there exists something such that if it is not basilican then it is not carotid is not false. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a backpacker it is not a no-goal. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of an ode it is a Erie. sent15: if the counterglow does eliminate then it is non-acaulescent. sent16: the capitalist disobliges biography if it is not a fulcrum. sent17: if the counterglow does not disoblige biography the fact that it is not a effluvium is not false. sent18: that the counterglow does not appear hold if that it does disoblige trigram is right. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not thankless it is a territorial. sent20: if the counterglow is urinary then it does not gall glued. sent21: that the U is carboniferous is true if it is not acaulescent.
sent1 -> hypothesis;
the reticulum is not unlivable if the fact that it does not green is correct.
sent6 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it does not disoblige biography is right it is not acaulescent is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the counterglow is not acaulescent if it does not disoblige biography. sent2: there exists something such that if it is leafless then it is not assertive. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a suborder it is not an asshole. sent4: there is something such that if it is territorial then it does not disoblige crystallography. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a piano it does not variegate Sperry. sent6: if something does not green it is not unlivable. sent7: if the counterglow is not a Tunisian it disobliges biography. sent8: if the counterglow is a kind of a Ross it is not acaulescent. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a nominal it is not a dishonor. sent10: there exists something such that if it is non-infinitival it does gall weapon. sent11: if the seismograph is not acaulescent then the fact that it does not disoblige trigram hold. sent12: that there exists something such that if it is not basilican then it is not carotid is not false. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a backpacker it is not a no-goal. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of an ode it is a Erie. sent15: if the counterglow does eliminate then it is non-acaulescent. sent16: the capitalist disobliges biography if it is not a fulcrum. sent17: if the counterglow does not disoblige biography the fact that it is not a effluvium is not false. sent18: that the counterglow does not appear hold if that it does disoblige trigram is right. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not thankless it is a territorial. sent20: if the counterglow is urinary then it does not gall glued. sent21: that the U is carboniferous is true if it is not acaulescent. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__