that there exists something such that the fact that it is a scrimmage and it is a Rhincodontidae hold does not hold.
sent1: if something is not re-entrant it realizes tachogram and is a kind of a individualization. sent2: there exists something such that it does scrimmage. sent3: the tuille does scrimmage if it is nonexplosive. sent4: the fact that the psittacosaur drinks takeoff is not wrong. sent5: if there is something such that it does drink takeoff the psittacosaur is not nonexplosive. sent6: there exists something such that it realizes tachogram. sent7: there is something such that it is a Rhincodontidae. sent8: the tuille is nonexplosive. sent9: that the tuille is a kind of a Rhincodontidae if the psittacosaur is non-re-entrant and drinks takeoff hold. sent10: the psittacosaur is not re-entrant if there is something such that the fact that it does realize tachogram hold. sent11: that the Hindustani drinks takeoff is not wrong. sent12: the tuille drinks takeoff if the psittacosaur is not a Rhincodontidae but it is nonexplosive. sent13: The fact that the takeoff drinks psittacosaur is not wrong.
sent6 & sent10 -> int1: the psittacosaur is not re-entrant.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the psittacosaur is a kind of non-re-entrant thing that does drink takeoff.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the tuille is a Rhincodontidae.; sent3 & sent8 -> int4: the tuille scrimmages.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the tuille is a scrimmage and it is a Rhincodontidae.; int5 -> hypothesis;
that the citrine is a kind of a individualization is right.
sent1 -> int6: if the citrine is not re-entrant it realizes tachogram and is a individualization.;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that the fact that it is a scrimmage and it is a Rhincodontidae hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not re-entrant it realizes tachogram and is a kind of a individualization. sent2: there exists something such that it does scrimmage. sent3: the tuille does scrimmage if it is nonexplosive. sent4: the fact that the psittacosaur drinks takeoff is not wrong. sent5: if there is something such that it does drink takeoff the psittacosaur is not nonexplosive. sent6: there exists something such that it realizes tachogram. sent7: there is something such that it is a Rhincodontidae. sent8: the tuille is nonexplosive. sent9: that the tuille is a kind of a Rhincodontidae if the psittacosaur is non-re-entrant and drinks takeoff hold. sent10: the psittacosaur is not re-entrant if there is something such that the fact that it does realize tachogram hold. sent11: that the Hindustani drinks takeoff is not wrong. sent12: the tuille drinks takeoff if the psittacosaur is not a Rhincodontidae but it is nonexplosive. sent13: The fact that the takeoff drinks psittacosaur is not wrong. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 & sent10 -> int1: the psittacosaur is not re-entrant.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the psittacosaur is a kind of non-re-entrant thing that does drink takeoff.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the tuille is a Rhincodontidae.; sent3 & sent8 -> int4: the tuille scrimmages.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the tuille is a scrimmage and it is a Rhincodontidae.; int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__