the soutane is a loaf.
sent1: if the mangosteen is allergic then the fact that the ironmonger is not an abdomen and it is not a scorch is false. sent2: if the ironmonger is a scorch then that the soutane is not a kind of a Siemens and is not a Malva is not correct. sent3: something is not intimal if the fact that it is non-anticlinal but not a formalization is not right. sent4: the candlenut is not a scorch. sent5: the necktie is a kind of a loaf. sent6: the ironmonger is a kind of a scorch. sent7: if that the camelhair is not actinal but it is allergic does not hold the mangosteen is allergic. sent8: if the ironmonger is a scorch that the soutane is not a kind of a Siemens but it is a Malva is not correct. sent9: if something is not a kind of a window then that it is not actinal and it is allergic does not hold. sent10: the ironmonger is not an antelope. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a loaf and it is not a Malva is incorrect then that it is not a kind of a scorch hold. sent12: that the soutane is not a Siemens but a Malva is wrong. sent13: that the soutane is a Siemens but it is not a Malva is incorrect if the ironmonger scorches. sent14: if that something is not a kind of a Siemens and it is not a Malva is not right then it is not a loaf. sent15: that the soutane is both a Siemens and not a Malva is not right.
sent2 & sent6 -> int1: that the soutane is not a Siemens and is not a Malva is not right.; sent14 -> int2: the soutane is not a loaf if that it is not a kind of a Siemens and it is not a kind of a Malva is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;
the soutane is a loaf.
sent9 -> int3: if the camelhair is not a kind of a window then that it is not actinal and it is allergic is incorrect.;
$hypothesis$ = the soutane is a loaf. ; $context$ = sent1: if the mangosteen is allergic then the fact that the ironmonger is not an abdomen and it is not a scorch is false. sent2: if the ironmonger is a scorch then that the soutane is not a kind of a Siemens and is not a Malva is not correct. sent3: something is not intimal if the fact that it is non-anticlinal but not a formalization is not right. sent4: the candlenut is not a scorch. sent5: the necktie is a kind of a loaf. sent6: the ironmonger is a kind of a scorch. sent7: if that the camelhair is not actinal but it is allergic does not hold the mangosteen is allergic. sent8: if the ironmonger is a scorch that the soutane is not a kind of a Siemens but it is a Malva is not correct. sent9: if something is not a kind of a window then that it is not actinal and it is allergic does not hold. sent10: the ironmonger is not an antelope. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a loaf and it is not a Malva is incorrect then that it is not a kind of a scorch hold. sent12: that the soutane is not a Siemens but a Malva is wrong. sent13: that the soutane is a Siemens but it is not a Malva is incorrect if the ironmonger scorches. sent14: if that something is not a kind of a Siemens and it is not a Malva is not right then it is not a loaf. sent15: that the soutane is both a Siemens and not a Malva is not right. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent6 -> int1: that the soutane is not a Siemens and is not a Malva is not right.; sent14 -> int2: the soutane is not a loaf if that it is not a kind of a Siemens and it is not a kind of a Malva is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__