Climate activists are prone to
see lukewarmism as a slightly more sophisticated but still fundamentally obstructionist form of denialism, and not without reason.
I have no time
for lukewarmism which simply validates the faulty science and quibbles about «estimates».
So when it becomes obvious that there is
lukewarmism amongst the GWPF fold, the coordinates on which that ignorance rested are disturbed.
Some activists will wonder why they should respectfully
engage lukewarmism just because abject denialism has become untenable.
Communicate this to Revkin (assuming you believe he's still reasonable, which honestly I doubt, IMO he teeters
between lukewarmism and denialsism, which in my mind are identical).
Hence I said that the more interesting characteristic
of lukewarmism is its accommodation to arguments from either other end of the continuum (notwithstanding its naivety)-- I don't think the middle ground has eschewed «ideology», though it is likely where there is more reflection on it.
... but as much as anyone it was Gavin who gave me the initial push towards climate scepticism or denialism or
lukewarmism or what - have - you.
Here's why: because Meyer and McArdle's thoughtful openness to some climate action, even if it's not exactly enthusiastic, shows that
lukewarmism isn't necessarily a rhetorical bulwark to meaningful climate policy.
On the contrary,
lukewarmism is often the sincere opinion of a good number of intelligent people of good will.