It's not about truth

The reason why we tend to want people to convert to atheism is that it will make their beliefs more correct (and hence they will make better predictions). So if they don't actually use their beliefs to control anticipation, then what's they point of converting them?

The article continues to assume that people need to be atheists, even after it's demolished its own reasons for doing so.

Teach people that objective truth really does matter, then they will have the motivation to be atheists.

I still think there isn't any good reason to be an atheist.

Apart from the parts which are wrong, there wasn't a single sentence which isn't already explicit in Dawkins and Dennett. (I haven't read much Hitchens so can't speak for him.)

It’s a popularity contest of ideologies: whichever side can win the most votes (converts) becomes the dominant (subjective) truth. Believers understand this on at least an instinctual level.

On the contrary, most believers would strongly disagree that religion is a popularity contest or that beliefs are subjective.

People do not embrace or reject religious doctrines on the basis of whether they are objectively true, they decide almost exclusively on the basis of the social implications. People will embrace and promote the beliefs that enhance the social dominance of their religious community, and will reject arguments, factual or not, that diminish their community’s influence and/or that would threaten their own individual standing within the community.

Tell that to the Christians thrown to the lions, the heretics tortured by the Spanish inquisition, or the Christian saints who achieved sainthood through martyrdom (to choose just some Christian examples).

What people are looking for are worthwhile communities that have at least a viable and respectable position in society. More importantly, people are looking for worthwhile communities in which they themselves can comfortably fit in and be respected participants.

I hate the weasel word "people". Some people might well be looking for these things. But "people" are just not that homogeneous.

In the end though, this is easy to agree with:

This leaves us with two missions: (a) to create communities where ordinary people, not necessarily science-minded, can feel comfortable, welcome, and important, and (b) to put social pressure on believers to give them enough of a nudge that they can overcome their existing social ties and uproot themselves and become members of the new, non-superstitious communities.