That's life forms affecting climate not evolution. While plant life can make an effect on local climates, as appears to have happened in the Sahara, how they change would not be nearly as significant as the fact of them being there.
um... I'm not sure I made my point clearly enough.
a long time ago, there were no photosynthetic organisms. photosynthetic organisms evolved from non-photosynthetic organisms 9probably from chemosynthetic organisms), and their propagation dramatically altered the Earth's atmosphere and, as a consequence, its climate.
That is one example of climate change resulting directly from biological evolution.
not quite so long ago, there were no trees on the land, only smaller plants. Trees evolved from these. trees colonized certain terrain and exploited specific ecological niches, and created forests. Unlike deserts or even grasslands, forests are rain-engines: they actually work to maintain a favorable local climate.
this is another example of climate change resulting from biological evolution.
The "fact of them being there" is a direct result of "how they change", so it is not clear to me whether you had a point to make.
No, it's evolution. The evolution of type II photosynthesis, which made plants far more efficient, decreased global CO2 levels and made the earth far colder.