Statements: • Some pencils are kites. • Some kites are desks. • All desks are jungles. • All jungles are mountains. Conclusions: I. Some mountains are pencils. II. Some jungles are pencils. III. Some mountains are desks. IV. Some jungles are kites. Choose the option that must follow.

Introduction / Context:
A universal ladder from Desks up to Mountains lets us promote existence from “Some kites are desks.” We test which conclusions are forced by that promotion and which would require extra overlaps.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• ∃k_d ∈ Kites ∩ Desks.
• Desks ⊆ Jungles ⊆ Mountains.
• ∃p_k ∈ Pencils ∩ Kites (may be different from k_d).

Concept / Approach:
From k_d and the universal steps, k_d ∈ Jungles and k_d ∈ Mountains, so III (“Some mountains are desks”) and IV (“Some jungles are kites”) are guaranteed. I and II require that the Pencil-Kite witness is the same as k_d; not required.

Step-by-Step Solution:
• Push k_d up: Desks → Jungles → Mountains.• Conclude III and IV immediately.• Note that nothing forces Pencils to overlap those Desks/Jungles, so I and II do not necessarily follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
Let the Pencil-Kite element lie outside Desks. Then III and IV remain true, while I and II fail.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
They include non-forced intersections with Pencils.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming all kites in different premises refer to the same items.

Final Answer:
Only III and IV follow.