A warming planet is much less of an issue than a cooling one would be. Most would simply look at National Geographic ice age maps and think "wow, cool, vast new lands!" But land alone isn't worth anything if it's all ice and dust and wastelands where nothing can grow,
The only reason we don't see ice ages for what they trully are - Mars on Earth - it's because most cientists started working on regions that were covered by ice (northern USA and Europe) or the few ones who got wetter in the ice age (american southwest). Overall the cold-and-rainy model is as fake as a three dollar bill. If scientists in the tropics were the ones to research it first most likely we would know it as "dry age". Whenever seas freeze and recede, rains fail anywhere; temperature differences between tropics and poles increase, and the same happens with large scale storms, fed by the steep gradients.
Of course, climate change itself, specially as fast as in our present days, is pretty much birth pains to our planet's ecology, but life would adapt and thrive on a warmer planet - for our world is colder than optimum, or to be more accurate, drier.
Anyways, only a species as stupid as humans would build coastal civilizations, drown it all in a few centuries and have the nerve to whine about it. But hey, it's good for Gaia.
You still could argue that our crops and so on would not thrive in a warmer world, but again, a species that breeds slave species like cows dumb as rocks and turkeys who drown in the rain (It sounds a lot like Reaper Indoctrination inded) shouldn't complain.
