Consider the following premises. For all x_16, x_16 will not drink water. For all x_16, x_16 is an artist if and only if x_16 will drink water. For all x_16, x_16 is an artist if and only if x_16 will climb a mountain. For all x_16, x_16 will climb a mountain if and only if x_16 will read a book. There is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is a mechanic if and only if x_16 will read a book. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_16, x_16 is a mechanic.
 From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 will climb a mountain if and only if x_16 will read a book we can infer that for all x_16, if x_16 reads a book, then x_16 is climbing a mountain. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is an artist if and only if x_16 will drink water, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not drink water we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is not an artist. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is an artist if and only if x_16 will climb a mountain, and that for all x_16, x_16 is not an artist we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will not climb a mountain. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 reads a book, then x_16 is climbing a mountain, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not climb a mountain we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will not read a book. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is a mechanic if and only if x_16 will read a book, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not read a book we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is not a mechanic, which contradicts that For all x_16, x_16 is a mechanic. Therefore, the answer is no.