there is something such that if the fact that it is both prescription and not intemperate is not true then it is a blindfold.
sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a Thurber and it does mush logogram is not right then it does dung. sent2: there is something such that if it is not nonprescription and not intemperate then it blindfolds. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that the fact that it is not a Binghamton and it mushes homeopath is not false is not true it is sociolinguistic. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is nonprescription and it is temperate is not correct then it does blindfold. sent5: the Kwell is temperate if the fact that it does not mush farrier and is meaty is not right. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a flavivirus then it is spondaic. sent7: if that something does not mush disfranchisement and is a Horneophyton does not hold it is meaty. sent8: if the fact that the mithramycin is both a pyrilamine and hyperemic is not true it is lysogenic. sent9: there is something such that if it is nonprescription it does blindfold. sent10: the Kwell blindfolds if it is not nonprescription and it is temperate. sent11: the seer is an identification if that it is temperate thing that does parley is not right. sent12: the fact that the tomentum is caudal is not wrong if that it is not temperate and it is not non-anoxic does not hold. sent13: if the fact that the Kwell is not nonprescription but temperate does not hold then it is a blindfold. sent14: if the Kwell is not temperate it is a kind of a blindfold.
sent13 -> hypothesis;
the fact that there exists something such that if that it does not mush disfranchisement and is a Horneophyton does not hold then it is meaty is not false.
sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the ogive does not mush disfranchisement but it is a Horneophyton is not correct it is meaty.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is both prescription and not intemperate is not true then it is a blindfold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a Thurber and it does mush logogram is not right then it does dung. sent2: there is something such that if it is not nonprescription and not intemperate then it blindfolds. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that the fact that it is not a Binghamton and it mushes homeopath is not false is not true it is sociolinguistic. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is nonprescription and it is temperate is not correct then it does blindfold. sent5: the Kwell is temperate if the fact that it does not mush farrier and is meaty is not right. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a flavivirus then it is spondaic. sent7: if that something does not mush disfranchisement and is a Horneophyton does not hold it is meaty. sent8: if the fact that the mithramycin is both a pyrilamine and hyperemic is not true it is lysogenic. sent9: there is something such that if it is nonprescription it does blindfold. sent10: the Kwell blindfolds if it is not nonprescription and it is temperate. sent11: the seer is an identification if that it is temperate thing that does parley is not right. sent12: the fact that the tomentum is caudal is not wrong if that it is not temperate and it is not non-anoxic does not hold. sent13: if the fact that the Kwell is not nonprescription but temperate does not hold then it is a blindfold. sent14: if the Kwell is not temperate it is a kind of a blindfold. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__