that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a antiphonary then the fact that the fact that it does not tag incorporation and it is not an attention is not incorrect is incorrect is correct.
sent1: if the glauconite is precancerous then that it is an attention and it is not a completeness is not true. sent2: that the chronograph does not tag incorporation but it is an attention is not right if it is a antiphonary. sent3: there is something such that if it is a antiphonary then it does not tag incorporation and is not a kind of an attention. sent4: that the chronograph tags incorporation but it is not an attention does not hold if it is antiphonary. sent5: there is something such that if it is a kind of a cowherb the fact that it is not a canary and it is not a coquette is wrong. sent6: if the samosa is an attention then the fact that it does not recast bear and does not recast shrike does not hold. sent7: if the chronograph is an attention then it is not a kind of a coquette and it is not a Charcot. sent8: if the chronograph is a antiphonary the fact that it does not tag incorporation and it is not a kind of an attention is not right. sent9: there is something such that if it is a broodmare then that it is abranchiate and it is not a kind of a dunlin does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a doggerel the fact that the fact that it tags thumbnail and it is not a kremlin is not wrong is not right. sent11: the chronograph is a kind of non-conjunctive thing that is not a kind of a antiphonary if it is back-channel. sent12: if the chronograph is elemental the fact that it is a kind of non-overt thing that does tag incorporation is not correct. sent13: if the shrike is a kind of a recapitulation then that it does not tag incorporation and is not a footfault is not right. sent14: the chronograph does not tag incorporation and is not an attention if it is antiphonary. sent15: there exists something such that if it is pneumatics then it is not a kind of a plenipotentiary and it does not defuse matchbook. sent16: if the chronograph is a quixotism the fact that it is congestive and it is not a kind of an attention is wrong. sent17: there exists something such that if that it does not guarantee samosa is not correct that it is not unethical and tags whiteface is false. sent18: the fact that the chronograph is conclusive but it does not tag incorporation does not hold if it relapses. sent19: there exists something such that if it is a Morse that it is not a kind of a psychotic and it is not a kind of a kremlin does not hold. sent20: if something is equitable that the fact that it is not an attention and it is not a Conium is not false does not hold.
sent8 -> hypothesis;
if the Aquarius is equitable the fact that it is not an attention and not a Conium is incorrect.
sent20 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a antiphonary then the fact that the fact that it does not tag incorporation and it is not an attention is not incorrect is incorrect is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the glauconite is precancerous then that it is an attention and it is not a completeness is not true. sent2: that the chronograph does not tag incorporation but it is an attention is not right if it is a antiphonary. sent3: there is something such that if it is a antiphonary then it does not tag incorporation and is not a kind of an attention. sent4: that the chronograph tags incorporation but it is not an attention does not hold if it is antiphonary. sent5: there is something such that if it is a kind of a cowherb the fact that it is not a canary and it is not a coquette is wrong. sent6: if the samosa is an attention then the fact that it does not recast bear and does not recast shrike does not hold. sent7: if the chronograph is an attention then it is not a kind of a coquette and it is not a Charcot. sent8: if the chronograph is a antiphonary the fact that it does not tag incorporation and it is not a kind of an attention is not right. sent9: there is something such that if it is a broodmare then that it is abranchiate and it is not a kind of a dunlin does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a doggerel the fact that the fact that it tags thumbnail and it is not a kremlin is not wrong is not right. sent11: the chronograph is a kind of non-conjunctive thing that is not a kind of a antiphonary if it is back-channel. sent12: if the chronograph is elemental the fact that it is a kind of non-overt thing that does tag incorporation is not correct. sent13: if the shrike is a kind of a recapitulation then that it does not tag incorporation and is not a footfault is not right. sent14: the chronograph does not tag incorporation and is not an attention if it is antiphonary. sent15: there exists something such that if it is pneumatics then it is not a kind of a plenipotentiary and it does not defuse matchbook. sent16: if the chronograph is a quixotism the fact that it is congestive and it is not a kind of an attention is wrong. sent17: there exists something such that if that it does not guarantee samosa is not correct that it is not unethical and tags whiteface is false. sent18: the fact that the chronograph is conclusive but it does not tag incorporation does not hold if it relapses. sent19: there exists something such that if it is a Morse that it is not a kind of a psychotic and it is not a kind of a kremlin does not hold. sent20: if something is equitable that the fact that it is not an attention and it is not a Conium is not false does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__