In a recent editorial, Peter Berkowitz proclaims that what he calls the “new new atheism” – popularized by books by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens – is basically the same as “old” atheism.
In some sense, he may have a point. After all, how many ways can one possibly talk about not accepting ideas that either are provided with no supporting evidence or are contradictory to the evidence? But in keeping with Berkowitz’s “there’s nothing new under the sun” theme, I’d like to point out that his criticisms of the “new new atheism” are … nothing new, themselves. More below the fold.

![[Cate playing Castlevania]](http://whenchemistsattack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/cate_konami_425.jpg)
![[Tom]](http://whenchemistsattack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/tom_t_450.jpg)
![[Orange juice carton - from top]](http://whenchemistsattack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/hmp_top.jpg)
![[High noon, July 4, North Myrtle Beach - 450px]](http://whenchemistsattack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/nmb_july4_450.jpg)
![[Pigeon]](http://whenchemistsattack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/pigeon_450.jpg)
![[Cate standing with the help of her toy basket]](http://whenchemistsattack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/cate_stand_450.jpg)