I found the following statement from Dr. Karl Payne very enlightening…
The New Atheist, like Harris, Hitchins, and Dawkins, represent nothing new as far as scientific discovery regarding the promotion of their opinions. Their thinking represents little more than an old idea with a new face; another verse on an old song. They sit in a peculiarly awkward position of assuming the validity of their arguments apart from the scientific testing method they champion, while criticizing and decrying anyone not strictly adhering to the testing method they assume and presume, but fail to demonstrate empirically.
They need a world that exists; is governed by laws that are predictable, rational and consistent; which can be known, understood and trusted. They have no ability to explain or prove empirically how nothing combined with time and blind luck could be responsible to account for everything that exists, including their methodology and conclusions.
At least the old atheists were honest about the inability of their position to empirically account for their basic assumptions regarding origins, life, natural law, laws of philosophy, the existence of information, aesthetics, ethics and morals. The New Atheist assumes their conclusions and condemns anyone disagreeing with them as wishful idiots. It would appear that theists are not the only ones who can be accused of living by faith. Does the inability of the New Atheists’ to test their own assumptions by their own empirical standard, and willingness to explain the origin of life through a leap of faith, constitute a tacit admission that they too should be included in the membership of those choosing to live by faith? It is time for the New Atheists to admit that words like “bigot”, “ignorant”, “zealot”, and “hypocrite” can be applied to atheists and well as theists.