The climate cycles on Earth are hundreds of thousands to millions of years long, with smaller variations separated by hundreds to thousands of years. Lesser and major ice ages are examples. So the Lovejoy McGill study is irrelevant in terms of climate science. Climate science is something very few climate "scientists" do. That said, cutting down forests and burning forests is removing a major source of carbon (dioxide) consumption (carbon sink). So CO2 variations (increases for now) are man-made. How CO2 influences the earth's temperature or climate is still not well understood. An example of that is the latest IPCC report, which says that CO2 is only a small driver of Earth's temperature. That is because (climate pseudo-scientists did not realize) CO2 reflects sunlight away from the Earth as well as trapping some of Earth's radiation inside the atmosphere. This is a mostly balancing effect.
If climate "scientists" were doing science, they would tell us that planting trees and forests could reverse the CO2 increase trend (trees eat CO2 and release oxygen). Banning long-term clear-cutting would reduce the CO2 increase trend. Banning slash-and-burn clearing would greatly reduce the CO2 increase trend. Forests regulate the climate in their region, not just under the forest canopy. Tree and forest planting is a simple, easy, low-tech, immediate solution to most if not all of the CO2 increase trend. That does not mean that climate change would stop. A large driver of climate change is the cycle of warm and cold water rivers in the ocean. Their paths appear to have two stable patterns. The paths may currently be flipping from the one stable setting to the other. There does not appear to be anything we can do to affect that.
Another problem is the "storage" of CO2 in the oceans. Oceanic CO2 is stored below the surface, until the below is full up. When the top of the storage level reaches the surface of the oceans, the stored CO2 is released very quickly. The level appears to be temperature driven, and has reached the surface in the Antarctic, with large regions bubbling furiously. This CO2 release could be a catastrophe to animal life on the surface. The saturation of the oceans with CO2 is already a major catastrophe to oceanic life, although there has not been significant study of how much CO2 acidity affects the population of various species. The only way we could fix the oceanic CO2 problem would be to reduce atmospheric CO2 (plant trees), plant forests of green plants in the shallows, and plant floating forests of green plants in the open seas. This would be a very long term project (centuries).
Another way to reduce the atmospheric and oceanic CO2 temporarily is to dump iron dust, iron oxide, and iron sulfate into the ocean. The resulting algae and plankton blooms eat CO2 and feed the oceanic food chain. But that CO2 quickly gets released. so it may not help in the long term.