Consider the following premises. For all x_16, if x_16 drives a car, then x_16 is an astronaut. For all x_16, if x_16 were a lawyer, then x_16 is a carpenter. For all x_16, x_16 will listen to a song or x_16 is a lawyer. There is at least one x_16 for which if x_16 were a bartender, then x_16 is an astronaut. For all x_16, x_16 will drive a car or x_16 is a bartender. For all x_16, x_16 is a carpenter or x_16 will not listen to a song. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_16, either x_16 is a carpenter or x_16 is an astronaut are not true.
 From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 drives a car, then x_16 is an astronaut, that there is at least one x_16 for which if x_16 were a bartender, then x_16 is an astronaut, and that for all x_16, x_16 will drive a car or x_16 is a bartender we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is an astronaut. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a carpenter or x_16 will not listen to a song we can infer that for all x_16, if x_16 listens to a song, then x_16 is a carpenter. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 listens to a song, then x_16 is a carpenter, that for all x_16, if x_16 were a lawyer, then x_16 is a carpenter, and that for all x_16, x_16 will listen to a song or x_16 is a lawyer we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is a carpenter. Finally, from the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a carpenter, and that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is an astronaut we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is a carpenter and x_16 is an astronaut, which contradicts that For all x_16, either x_16 is a carpenter or x_16 is an astronaut are not true. Therefore, the answer is no.