You see what you want.
Co2 benefits plants.
Plants benefit the environment.
The world has more plants than it did.
Get over it.

 Its a weak argument to compare C02 generators in greenhouses to the planet's overall climate.  Saying plants benefit the environment is intentionally simplistic.  Plants surviving isn't the argument climate change activists are making, Humans surviving is.

 When plants that can not sustain human life at the magnitude it is today and in the projected future there is an issue.  Saying more green is universally good is a flawed logic.  Not all green sustains humans, not all green converts C02 to o2 at a sustainable level in every environment.

 To achieve that you need to enclose the environment and amplify the atmosphere's beneficial components because the natural environment is not appropriate for the needed level of performance.  Like a greenhouse.

 

 If not agreeing with the logic of one image means, to you, that I don't agree with anything else then I don't know what to tell you.

 I can think climate change is not as severe as it is typically portrayed, and also think one specific analogy to support that concept is a poor argument.  You fail to understand no matter how much I explain.