Of course the majority of the papers did not reach a conclusion! It would be impossible to prove! Scientifically impossible. To propose otherwise is fraudulent. Anyone who comes down on either side and claims that their conclusion is scientific proof is a fraud
And typically, you propose a theory to explain an observation. You publish that theory openly for peer review.
AGW proponents modify the observation, applying “corrections” to increase/decrease temps and sea levels to meet the desired theory. Then they refuse to reveal the methodology used to calculate and apply these “corrections”, and their peers just accept it as fact rather than face backlash for questioning AGW dogma.