@Gabbienixon Nevermind! found my answer from instructor Kevin below:

No, it's not.

If A, then Not B.

The contrapositive is:

If B, then Not A.

In other words, A and B are two entirely separate categories. If you're in one, you're not in the other.

That's what "No A is B" means.

"No A are B" does NOT mean "/A --> B". "/A --> B" means everything that's not an A must be B. That's different from saying if something is an A, then it's not a B.

Could we distribute the negation to A instead of B as to say /A > B or does the negation have to go on the B set (A >/B)

if we can say No parrots are clever would that not follow as /P>C

or does it have to negate the C (clever) P>/C ? confused why we the negation is No A are B with the Negation slash on the B

help!

@ArionHaddock "where" by itself is an indicator for sufficiency, "only where" is indicator for nessecary