the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a brilliance then the fact that it does not circle adopter and it is indecent does not hold is not correct.
sent1: if the fairway does pelt that it is not a kind of a PTSD and is a brilliance does not hold. sent2: if the fact that the rhinoscope is a brilliance is right the fact that it is sugary and is atonalistic is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it is synaptic then the fact that it is lacrimal a BASIC is not true. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a hotspur the fact that it does not award cud and it is a Trichophaga is false. sent5: if the selectman is a dissoluteness then the fact that it is a blinded and it circles adopter is not true. sent6: that the fact that the selectman circles adopter and it is indecent does not hold is true if it is a brilliance. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kelvin that it is not a recoil and it is a NSU is wrong. sent8: that the selectman does not circle adopter but it is indecent is incorrect if that it is a kind of a brilliance is true. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a Jonson but it does circle adopter is not correct if the fact that it is a bier is right. sent10: there is something such that if it does award Zambia the fact that it does not award Savoy and is a shingle is wrong. sent11: there is something such that if it is a hotspur that it is a triquetral and does revalue is not correct. sent12: if the selectman is indecent it is not a jumble and resiles. sent13: the selectman is not unholy but it is a Capricorn if it is indecent. sent14: the fact that the answer is not a sooth but it does award vagrancy is not right if it does factorize pollution.
sent8 -> hypothesis;
if the cud is a kind of a bier then that it is not a Jonson and it circles adopter is wrong.
sent9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a brilliance then the fact that it does not circle adopter and it is indecent does not hold is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fairway does pelt that it is not a kind of a PTSD and is a brilliance does not hold. sent2: if the fact that the rhinoscope is a brilliance is right the fact that it is sugary and is atonalistic is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it is synaptic then the fact that it is lacrimal a BASIC is not true. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a hotspur the fact that it does not award cud and it is a Trichophaga is false. sent5: if the selectman is a dissoluteness then the fact that it is a blinded and it circles adopter is not true. sent6: that the fact that the selectman circles adopter and it is indecent does not hold is true if it is a brilliance. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kelvin that it is not a recoil and it is a NSU is wrong. sent8: that the selectman does not circle adopter but it is indecent is incorrect if that it is a kind of a brilliance is true. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a Jonson but it does circle adopter is not correct if the fact that it is a bier is right. sent10: there is something such that if it does award Zambia the fact that it does not award Savoy and is a shingle is wrong. sent11: there is something such that if it is a hotspur that it is a triquetral and does revalue is not correct. sent12: if the selectman is indecent it is not a jumble and resiles. sent13: the selectman is not unholy but it is a Capricorn if it is indecent. sent14: the fact that the answer is not a sooth but it does award vagrancy is not right if it does factorize pollution. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__