the bowfin is not a jumble if the in-law is not temperamental.
sent1: if the caustic is rentable but it does not destalinize bowfin then the handbell is not a Wharton. sent2: if the handbell does destalinize bowfin but it is not a Wharton then the bowfin is not a kind of a jumble. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that that it is a kind of rentable thing that does not destalinize bowfin is not false is not correct then the fact that the bowfin is not a jumble is not wrong. sent4: if the bumper does not trundle handbell the in-law is temperamental.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the caustic is rentable and does not destalinize bowfin.; sent1 & assump2 -> int1: the handbell is not a Wharton.;
$hypothesis$ = the bowfin is not a jumble if the in-law is not temperamental. ; $context$ = sent1: if the caustic is rentable but it does not destalinize bowfin then the handbell is not a Wharton. sent2: if the handbell does destalinize bowfin but it is not a Wharton then the bowfin is not a kind of a jumble. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that that it is a kind of rentable thing that does not destalinize bowfin is not false is not correct then the fact that the bowfin is not a jumble is not wrong. sent4: if the bumper does not trundle handbell the in-law is temperamental. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the caustic is rentable and does not destalinize bowfin.; sent1 & assump2 -> int1: the handbell is not a Wharton.; __UNKNOWN__