I got overwhelmed by the avalanche of reporting from copenhagen while I was still trying to find out what they were really talking about in Copenhagen.
Global warming, ozone layer, carbon credits and emissions etc. looked like the icing on the cake that I could not see.
Then came the whole lot confusion, resentment, anger persuasion etc of negotiating the text , with some trying to keep alive the kyoto agreement (where in the world is that place?and why do they want to keep it alive?), while some others wanted to wipe kyoto off.
Obama strode in , the Chinese premier and Indian Prime minister both sulked, and while the european countries lined up behind the US as usual the Africans feeling more safer in the company of brown skins stood beside the Indians and didn't particularly mind the Sino-Indian camarderie.
Locally, I listened to a lot of technical jargons, conjectures and theories - coming from my friends & colleagues who in the first place never believed in weather/climate or its forecasts. All of a sudden their awareness had increased.
But of all the people only one man spoke explicitly and sensibly about climate talks, laying things out simply - M.D.Nalappat . Its better to read him than attend any Copenhagen talks.