Unlikely.
New Atheism was founded on the idea that a specific belief alone was enough to deem you stupider than your peers, as in, believing that there is something beyond this mortal coil is not only logically inconsistent, but a tacit admission that you are intellectually impaired. This stance is founded in pride and ego (the deadliest sin one can commit, ironically enough), fancying yourself as smarter because you have more means to increase the knowledge that can be contained in your frontal lobe than someone from 100 years ago. In reality, the average person of today is likely just as smart as his ancestors, it's just that our society is more advanced due to the accumulation of knowledge and information rather than an outright increase in IQ (which was contributed through better nutrition, living conditions and education, not the way people think). Opening a history book reveals that great, highly influential thinkers like Issac Newton, Leonhard Euler, Michael Faraday and Antoine Lavoisier are just some of the many scientists of the past that also were devout Christians. Issac Newton, arguably the greatest scientist of all time, infamously stated that "He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God". If anything, there is a case to be made that our over-reliance on technology has probably decreased our "street smart" intelligence, which the people of yesterday were not lacking in any capacity, partially because the living conditions back then were a bit more ruthless and as such demanded that you figure out how the world actually works or die.
In my opinion, one of the biggest factors which killed the New Atheism movement was the fact that the way atheists argued against theism wasn't through reason, but emotions. A lot of New Atheist scholars and thinkers resorted to crude remarks, strawmanning or just straight up shitflinging to make their point. From an outsider's perspective, they looked like manchildren, and truth be told, a lot of them are. Seriously, look up a debate between Peter Atkins, well known atheist and chemist, and John Lennox, famous mathematician and bioethicist (
https://youtu.be/wPne50azYfs?si=58_LxcFRondRLW7G). Just hearing the way Richard responds and reacts to the arguments of John in contrast to John immediately tells you who is more certain and grounded in their beliefs. John, on the other hand, even when he is verbally insulted, calmly explains his stance as to why Christianity explains the world the best. Arguments aside, if we are judging people based on the way they express themselves, John Lennox wins here any day of the week. Honestly, Atkins sounds fucking miserable. It's to the point where you ask yourself: "Even if you are right, what's even the point if this is the result of living in a godless world?"
Another thing that's worth noting is that with the Western world becoming more and more secular, traditional values that were the backbone of society, like large families, cultural homogeneity and religiosity, were slowly disregarded. Since neoliberalism works parasitically, society was (and still is) in a downtrend. This has left a lot of people wondering if the cultural aspect that Western society of yesterday was founded on was the reason everything was just better back then, religiosity included. I don't know about you, but loving your neighbor, showing forgiveness and tenderness, and fighting your passions sounds quite healthy. Now sure, there was an abuse of institutional power, but truth be told, this is a timeless phenomenon and not strictly inherent to Christianity. If anything, it was much easier to call out this abuse of power by appealing to the Christian's ethics whenever he misbehaved.
That's not to say that there aren't intellectually honest atheist thinkers out there, Alex O' Connor is a good example. But given that the majority of agnostic and atheist individuals act smug about their beliefs instead of choosing to live their life without God, most people's image of an atheist has devolved from a Bible-reading, science based English scholar of the 20th century to a fat Reddit atheist. And most of it is of their own making.
And I haven't even gotten into the fact that secular ethics are still questionable at best. They all operate on the basis that human life is inherently valuable, which is actually a Christian idea, not a Roman or Greek idea. But I think I've made my point clear enough.