the fact that there is something such that if it does not investigate shearing that it is both impure and tutorial is false does not hold.
sent1: there is something such that if it does not investigate shearing then it is impure and is a tutorial. sent2: the fact that the retinene is impure and is a tutorial is incorrect if it investigates shearing. sent3: the fact that something is a dot and it is a burden is incorrect if it does not suppurate. sent4: something is impure thing that is tutorial if it does not investigate shearing. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a bollworm then the fact that it does investigate ZIP and does debrief cisco is incorrect. sent6: there is something such that if that it investigates shearing is true that it is impure thing that is tutorial does not hold. sent7: if something does not investigate shearing then that it is impure and it is tutorial does not hold. sent8: if the retinene does not investigate shearing then it is impure and is a tutorial. sent9: the fact that something does investigate ZIP and investigates sandhi is not right if it does not diffuse retinene. sent10: that the cisco is a kind of a jobcentre that investigates shearing is false if it is not a sultana. sent11: something is a muncher and is a kind of a Ugric if it does not debrief outskirt. sent12: that something is impure and it is a kind of a tutorial is not right if it does investigate shearing.
sent7 -> int1: that the retinene is both impure and a tutorial does not hold if it does not investigate shearing.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it does not investigate shearing that it is both impure and tutorial is false does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it does not investigate shearing then it is impure and is a tutorial. sent2: the fact that the retinene is impure and is a tutorial is incorrect if it investigates shearing. sent3: the fact that something is a dot and it is a burden is incorrect if it does not suppurate. sent4: something is impure thing that is tutorial if it does not investigate shearing. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a bollworm then the fact that it does investigate ZIP and does debrief cisco is incorrect. sent6: there is something such that if that it investigates shearing is true that it is impure thing that is tutorial does not hold. sent7: if something does not investigate shearing then that it is impure and it is tutorial does not hold. sent8: if the retinene does not investigate shearing then it is impure and is a tutorial. sent9: the fact that something does investigate ZIP and investigates sandhi is not right if it does not diffuse retinene. sent10: that the cisco is a kind of a jobcentre that investigates shearing is false if it is not a sultana. sent11: something is a muncher and is a kind of a Ugric if it does not debrief outskirt. sent12: that something is impure and it is a kind of a tutorial is not right if it does investigate shearing. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: that the retinene is both impure and a tutorial does not hold if it does not investigate shearing.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__