Well, what about all those Luciferian texts and the Luciferian cults and the Luciferian this and the Luciferian that?
Well, there may be a few small cults here and there that identify as "Luciferian" (and might be considered as such by some, like the Process Church) but as you probably know a handful of people can get together and call themselves whatever they want.
It's much the same way people misidentify the Eye of Providence with the Eye of Horus. Because they can and it feels good.
The truth is that the "facts" you might have heard about the "Luciferians" in the New World Order are based entirely on rumor and innuendo arising from the fertile imaginations of religious paranoids, many of which are of extremely recent vintage (Jack Chick, Texe Marrs, Tony Alamo, etc etc etc).
The name has entered the lexicon because "Satanist" sounds too trailer-park, is my best guess. "Luciferian" sounds all hoity-toity and Masterpiece Theatre. British accents are almost de rigeur.
Similarly, the Bavarian Illuminati were not "Luciferian," unless you begin to stretch the term to mean absolutely anything you want it to. The Bavarian Illuminati were in fact Enlightenment rationalists, most of whom had little time for supernaturalism of any kind.
And given the incredible evil and totalitarianism that's out in the open, do we still really need myths of secret UN Theosophists setting the table for Lucifer's return? It seems almost comforting in light of the insanity that's gripping this country (oh, like the mainstreaming of Satanism) and the rest of the planet as well.
Indeed, it's all too fitting that Lucifer retired as King of Hell in the comics and now the TV series since he or more accurately, the title, seems to have been press-ganged into service in the first place.
As many of you might know, there is in fact a Luciferian body of literature of another kind, myths of light-bringers who defied the Great Sky Gods in order to grant knowledge unto humans and paid a terrible price for these gifts.
It could very well be why these Gnostic groups saw the Serpent in the Garden of Eden as the good guy- some even saw him as Christ himself- because he came to free Adam and Eve from the bondage of ignorance. As it turns out, they were cribbing their theology from other sources.
I just referenced Chris Knowles in another thread. I've heard him say before that he doesn't believe Luciferianism is actually a thing. But as your referenced quote shows, he does believe Satanism is very much a thing.
For this reason pseudo-skeptics can be useful. Not because they might be right, but because they will be able to identify and point out the blind spots in the thinking of the other side. Even if you are right about an issue, you will still have blind spots caused by your own bias and someone with a different opinion who may ultimately be wrong about the issue will be able to see your blind spots and point them out to you - even if they are ultimately wrong on the issue.
(And the criticisms of a pseudo-skeptic, like everyone, will have blind spots caused by their own bias.)