Of course,
none of them claim certainty, and many disagree among themselves, and the work could never be finished as there's always the possibility of new evidence being discovered, so that's really not an answer to those questions.
The effect was to let the public be deluded about such things, by those who hoped that the public would rise up and demand politicial action, while the climate scientists could comfortably sit back, let the wild
claims appear to be part
of their famously «settled» science, knowing that if the «predictions» failed, they could point to their refereed journal papers that made no such explicit
claims, or at least
none with
claimed certainty, thus achieving sensational scare stories but with plausible deniability.