the thrombin does mold.
sent1: the fact that the thrombin is not a gargle is correct if it is not nonfat or does not mold or both. sent2: if the breadstick is nonfat thing that is not algal then the thrombin is not a molding. sent3: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin or it is not coccal or both. sent4: the potation is non-shy and/or is not coccal. sent5: the fact that the breadstick is not thermohydrometric and scallops expiation is incorrect. sent6: the potation is not a jaundice if it is not a kind of a shy and/or is not coccal. sent7: the fact that the breadstick is not thermohydrometric and does not scallop expiation is not right. sent8: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin if it does scallop expiation. sent9: if the breadstick does not scallop thrombin then it does gargle. sent10: the potation is a kind of a jaundice if the breadstick is algal. sent11: something is a kind of a gargle that is nonfat if it does not scallop thrombin. sent12: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin if that that it is not thermohydrometric and does not scallop expiation is not wrong is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the breadstick is algal.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the potation jaundices.; sent6 & sent4 -> int2: the potation is not a jaundice.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the breadstick is not algal.; sent11 -> int5: if the breadstick does not scallop thrombin it is a gargle and it is nonfat.; sent12 & sent7 -> int6: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the breadstick does gargle and it is nonfat.; int7 -> int8: the breadstick is not fatty.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the breadstick is nonfat and not algal.; int9 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the thrombin does mold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the thrombin is not a gargle is correct if it is not nonfat or does not mold or both. sent2: if the breadstick is nonfat thing that is not algal then the thrombin is not a molding. sent3: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin or it is not coccal or both. sent4: the potation is non-shy and/or is not coccal. sent5: the fact that the breadstick is not thermohydrometric and scallops expiation is incorrect. sent6: the potation is not a jaundice if it is not a kind of a shy and/or is not coccal. sent7: the fact that the breadstick is not thermohydrometric and does not scallop expiation is not right. sent8: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin if it does scallop expiation. sent9: if the breadstick does not scallop thrombin then it does gargle. sent10: the potation is a kind of a jaundice if the breadstick is algal. sent11: something is a kind of a gargle that is nonfat if it does not scallop thrombin. sent12: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin if that that it is not thermohydrometric and does not scallop expiation is not wrong is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the breadstick is algal.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the potation jaundices.; sent6 & sent4 -> int2: the potation is not a jaundice.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the breadstick is not algal.; sent11 -> int5: if the breadstick does not scallop thrombin it is a gargle and it is nonfat.; sent12 & sent7 -> int6: the breadstick does not scallop thrombin.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the breadstick does gargle and it is nonfat.; int7 -> int8: the breadstick is not fatty.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the breadstick is nonfat and not algal.; int9 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__