It's utter bollocks (can I use that word here?).

What they show in the picture (is it even real? Why no picture from up close from the sidewalk?) doesn't look like a Roman temple to me and in any case a disused temple wouldn't get buried in the ground with all its pillars upright. It certainly wouldn't be excavated with big machinery as seen there.

The article claims "bronze hand tools that after preliminary field testing, seem to contain traces of the same iron found in the hills outside of Rome". Let's ignore the bronze tools containing iron (which might be possible in some convoluted way), and focus on the "hills outside Rome" part. The Romans got their iron from all over the empire, but not from central Italy.

And what of the claim that "many people sailed westward including a large flotilla of ships that was apparently lost at sea after a large storm." I don't even know if that is true, but if the ships were lost in a storm, they didn't land in America, did they? Where would they have gotten their supplies to cross the ocean? Were their ships even ocean-worthy? The Meditteranean is a lot different from the Atlantic.

(Edits to add debunking of nonsense.)