there is something such that if it is not Balzacian then it is both a langley and not a cooking.
sent1: if the Pound is not a scapular then it is not non-anisogamic and is not a crith. sent2: if the botanical is Balzacian it is a langley and it is not a cooking. sent3: the botanical is a langley and a cooking if it is not Balzacian. sent4: there is something such that if it is not Balzacian it is a langley. sent5: if the botanical is not Balzacian then the fact that it is a langley that is not a cooking is not false. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not Balzacian it is a langley and it is a kind of a cooking. sent7: there is something such that if it is Balzacian it is a kind of a langley and it is not a kind of a cooking.
sent5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not Balzacian then it is both a langley and not a cooking. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Pound is not a scapular then it is not non-anisogamic and is not a crith. sent2: if the botanical is Balzacian it is a langley and it is not a cooking. sent3: the botanical is a langley and a cooking if it is not Balzacian. sent4: there is something such that if it is not Balzacian it is a langley. sent5: if the botanical is not Balzacian then the fact that it is a langley that is not a cooking is not false. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not Balzacian it is a langley and it is a kind of a cooking. sent7: there is something such that if it is Balzacian it is a kind of a langley and it is not a kind of a cooking. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__