I think the answer is an absolutely unequivocal "reversing it". Regardless of the underlying cause, I don't think that anyone would argue that the potential effects of global warming are anything less than catastrophic. In that light, it only makes sense to talk about adjusting to climate change when you've decided that preventing it in the first place is an entirely impossible task.
Many more people die now from cold weather than from warm weather. So maybe a little rise in temperature is a good thing. And historic evidence shows that warmer climate meant more productive crops in the middle ages and in the roman empire.
Maybe I am wrong, but I would need more solid evidence of the catastrophic consequences of climate change before sentencing millions of people to death because we choose to spend money fighting climate change instead of fighting malaria or improving access to clean water.