Agree, this is pretty common for "climate research" and is one of the reasons why climate research has major credibility problems and deniers - there will be people who deny this garbage level "research" due to lack of rigor
This one found that there is near unanimity regarding humans being a major component of climate change. It is not “garbage level”, or lacking rigour. It is a useful contribution to the field.
There is a “credibility problem” because vested interests spend a lot of money trying to undermine research that will hurt them financially. This is thoroughly documented.
To qualify for research it gotta include materials, methods, conduct experiments, build quantitative models - to have some research rigor applied to the climate domain. Only after that,a researcher can claim some novel contribution based on his own model.
Otherwise it is not climate research (a STEM discipline), but more like blogging/journalism - a a study of what other people write - human sciences type research which lacks rigor and suffers from inability to reproduce research
It's not exactly a scientific endeavour.