Consider the following premises. For all x_2, if x_2 climbs a mountain, then x_2 is a server. For all x_2, if x_2 were excited, then x_2 is a server. For all x_2, if x_2 were a server, then x_2 is climbing a mountain. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_2 for which the fact that x_2 were excited does not imply that x_2 is climbing a mountain.
 From the fact that for all x_2, if x_2 climbs a mountain, then x_2 is a server, and that for all x_2, if x_2 were a server, then x_2 is climbing a mountain we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 will climb a mountain if and only if x_2 is a server. From the fact that for all x_2, x_2 will climb a mountain if and only if x_2 is a server we can infer that for all x_2, if x_2 were a server, then x_2 is climbing a mountain. Finally, from the fact that for all x_2, if x_2 were excited, then x_2 is a server, and that for all x_2, if x_2 were a server, then x_2 is climbing a mountain we can infer that for all x_2, if x_2 were excited, then x_2 is climbing a mountain, which contradicts that There is at least one x_2 for which the fact that x_2 were excited does not imply that x_2 is climbing a mountain. Therefore, the answer is no.