that that there is something such that if it is a show-stopper that it does not repress picul and it is not non-propulsive is not correct is not false is not right.
sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is a show-stopper is correct then the fact that the fact that it does repress picul and it is propulsive is not incorrect is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a show-stopper then it does not repress picul and it is propulsive. sent3: if something is bicapsular then that it is not a calefaction but anisometropic is incorrect. sent4: that the Londoner is not a kind of a Milanese but it is propulsive is incorrect if it is Palladian. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is a ten is right then that it is not Alaskan and it does sample creole-fish is wrong. sent6: the Londoner does not repress picul but it is propulsive if that it is a show-stopper is not wrong. sent7: the fact that something does repress picul and it is propulsive does not hold if it is a show-stopper. sent8: the fact that the Londoner is not a tablespoon and represses picul does not hold if the fact that it is a philhellene is not false. sent9: something does not repress picul and is propulsive if it is a kind of a show-stopper. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a cragsman that it does not slight and it excretes actinomycete is not correct. sent11: if something is a show-stopper that it does not repress picul and it is propulsive is wrong. sent12: if the Londoner is a kind of a show-stopper the fact that it represses picul and is propulsive is incorrect.
sent11 -> int1: if the Londoner is a kind of a show-stopper that it does not repress picul and is propulsive does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that that there is something such that if it is a show-stopper that it does not repress picul and it is not non-propulsive is not correct is not false is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is a show-stopper is correct then the fact that the fact that it does repress picul and it is propulsive is not incorrect is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a show-stopper then it does not repress picul and it is propulsive. sent3: if something is bicapsular then that it is not a calefaction but anisometropic is incorrect. sent4: that the Londoner is not a kind of a Milanese but it is propulsive is incorrect if it is Palladian. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is a ten is right then that it is not Alaskan and it does sample creole-fish is wrong. sent6: the Londoner does not repress picul but it is propulsive if that it is a show-stopper is not wrong. sent7: the fact that something does repress picul and it is propulsive does not hold if it is a show-stopper. sent8: the fact that the Londoner is not a tablespoon and represses picul does not hold if the fact that it is a philhellene is not false. sent9: something does not repress picul and is propulsive if it is a kind of a show-stopper. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a cragsman that it does not slight and it excretes actinomycete is not correct. sent11: if something is a show-stopper that it does not repress picul and it is propulsive is wrong. sent12: if the Londoner is a kind of a show-stopper the fact that it represses picul and is propulsive is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> int1: if the Londoner is a kind of a show-stopper that it does not repress picul and is propulsive does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__