that there exists something such that if that it is profane is correct it is not a Dagon and it is not a kind of a merchant is false.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is profane it is not a merchant. sent2: there exists something such that if it is brunet it does not churn undercut and it does not exsiccate Lome. sent3: there exists something such that if it is profane it is not a kind of a Dagon. sent4: there is something such that if it is profane it is not a Dagon and it is a kind of a merchant. sent5: there exists something such that if it is licit it is not indulgent and is not a kind of a Waller. sent6: the fact that the sake is a portable but it is not tearless hold if it is eremitic. sent7: if the occlusion is profane it is not a merchant. sent8: there is something such that if it does rap Christchurch it is non-canonic. sent9: there exists something such that if it does bribe then it does not churn ampere-minute and it does not exsiccate antipathy. sent10: something is non-ethnological thing that is not a tachometer if it is eremitic. sent11: if the occlusion is profane then it is not a Dagon and not a merchant. sent12: if the diptych is a Dagon it is not catabolic. sent13: there is something such that if it does rap Danu then it is conscious and does not rap irredentism. sent14: there is something such that if the fact that it is profane is true then it is a Dagon and it is not a merchant. sent15: that the occlusion is a Dagon but it is not a kind of a merchant is true if it is profane. sent16: there is something such that if it is cervine then it is not a kind of an abdominal and is not a kind of a Wellington.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
the occlusion is not ethnological and it is not a kind of a tachometer if it is eremitic.
sent10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if that it is profane is correct it is not a Dagon and it is not a kind of a merchant is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is profane it is not a merchant. sent2: there exists something such that if it is brunet it does not churn undercut and it does not exsiccate Lome. sent3: there exists something such that if it is profane it is not a kind of a Dagon. sent4: there is something such that if it is profane it is not a Dagon and it is a kind of a merchant. sent5: there exists something such that if it is licit it is not indulgent and is not a kind of a Waller. sent6: the fact that the sake is a portable but it is not tearless hold if it is eremitic. sent7: if the occlusion is profane it is not a merchant. sent8: there is something such that if it does rap Christchurch it is non-canonic. sent9: there exists something such that if it does bribe then it does not churn ampere-minute and it does not exsiccate antipathy. sent10: something is non-ethnological thing that is not a tachometer if it is eremitic. sent11: if the occlusion is profane then it is not a Dagon and not a merchant. sent12: if the diptych is a Dagon it is not catabolic. sent13: there is something such that if it does rap Danu then it is conscious and does not rap irredentism. sent14: there is something such that if the fact that it is profane is true then it is a Dagon and it is not a merchant. sent15: that the occlusion is a Dagon but it is not a kind of a merchant is true if it is profane. sent16: there is something such that if it is cervine then it is not a kind of an abdominal and is not a kind of a Wellington. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__