that there exists something such that either it is denotative or it is aerological or both is not correct.
sent1: if something is not non-Corsican then the fact that it does not quench Lammastide and is aerological does not hold. sent2: the fact that the spinach is not a diviner hold. sent3: something is Corsican if it is radiolucent. sent4: if the fact that the electrotherapist is a Wilton and/or enacts LGB is wrong it is aerological. sent5: that the sigmoidoscope is denotative and/or is not a psalmist is not right. sent6: if the fact that something does not quench Lammastide and is aerological does not hold it is not aerological. sent7: that the electrotherapist is a Wilton and/or it does not enact LGB is false. sent8: the electrotherapist enacts LGB. sent9: the electrotherapist is aerological if the fact that either it is a Wilton or it does not enact LGB or both is wrong. sent10: something is a Wilton and/or it is aerological. sent11: the spinach is radiolucent thing that does stampede thermocouple if it is not a kind of a diviner.
sent9 & sent7 -> int1: the electrotherapist is aerological.; int1 -> int2: the electrotherapist is denotative or it is aerological or both.; int2 -> hypothesis;
the spinach is a callithump.
sent6 -> int3: if that the spinach does not quench Lammastide and is aerological is not true then it is not aerological.; sent1 -> int4: that the spinach does not quench Lammastide and is aerological is wrong if it is Corsican.; sent3 -> int5: the spinach is Corsican if it is radiolucent.; sent11 & sent2 -> int6: the spinach is radiolucent and it does stampede thermocouple.; int6 -> int7: the spinach is radiolucent.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the spinach is Corsican.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the spinach does not quench Lammastide but it is aerological is wrong.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the spinach is not aerological.;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that either it is denotative or it is aerological or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-Corsican then the fact that it does not quench Lammastide and is aerological does not hold. sent2: the fact that the spinach is not a diviner hold. sent3: something is Corsican if it is radiolucent. sent4: if the fact that the electrotherapist is a Wilton and/or enacts LGB is wrong it is aerological. sent5: that the sigmoidoscope is denotative and/or is not a psalmist is not right. sent6: if the fact that something does not quench Lammastide and is aerological does not hold it is not aerological. sent7: that the electrotherapist is a Wilton and/or it does not enact LGB is false. sent8: the electrotherapist enacts LGB. sent9: the electrotherapist is aerological if the fact that either it is a Wilton or it does not enact LGB or both is wrong. sent10: something is a Wilton and/or it is aerological. sent11: the spinach is radiolucent thing that does stampede thermocouple if it is not a kind of a diviner. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent7 -> int1: the electrotherapist is aerological.; int1 -> int2: the electrotherapist is denotative or it is aerological or both.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__