Consider the following premises. For all x_16, if x_16 takes a plane, then x_16 is working. For all x_16, if x_16 climbs a mountain, then x_16 is not working. For all x_16, x_16 will climb a mountain or x_16 will sleep. For all x_16, if x_16 were a police officer, then x_16 is working. For all x_16, x_16 will take a plane or x_16 is a police officer. For all x_16, x_16 is a poet and x_16 will cook. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_16 for which either x_16 is a poet or x_16 will sleep are not true.
 From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 takes a plane, then x_16 is working, that for all x_16, if x_16 were a police officer, then x_16 is working, and that for all x_16, x_16 will take a plane or x_16 is a police officer we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will work. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 climbs a mountain, then x_16 is not working, and that for all x_16, x_16 will work we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will not climb a mountain. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a poet and x_16 will cook we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is a poet. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 will climb a mountain or x_16 will sleep, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not climb a mountain we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will sleep. Finally, from the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a poet, and that for all x_16, x_16 will sleep we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is a poet and x_16 will sleep, which contradicts that There is at least one x_16 for which either x_16 is a poet or x_16 will sleep are not true. Therefore, the answer is no.