To me, this kind of “study” is proof only that there’s a lot of money in the “climate change” industry and it’s all on one side.
What are the chances that in a complex biosphere like earth, 1 or 2 degrees of warming will cause 467 distinct catastrophes and not 1 single benefit to anyone or any animal? The only possible way to get that result if you have a ‘climate change’ market structure in which discovering a new catastrophe associated with global warming will advance your career and discovering beneficial results will not.
If you had an actual scientific approach, it’s possible that the vast majority of effects of any change could be negative, but 467 out of 467 is not possible and signals a market structure that calls every single one of those studies into question.