I don't find it to be very trustworthy and found some scholarship disputing some claims, but can't find evidence disputing all the claims it makes, but also find the claims somewhat hard to believe.
You're right to be skeptical. This all kinds of wrong.
In the order of claims:
I'm sorry, but no. Egyptian artifacts were not found in Arizona. The closest thing to this that's actually been found is the Calixtlahuaca head, but that is widely considered a hoax. If only Payon had properly recorded his digs...
Their evidence that there's no progression in Mesoamerican pyramid design is just ridiculous. Here's a picture of La Venta. Interestingly, just like early egyptian Pyramids, La venta was in fact probably stepped. Designed eventually moved from that to more complicated structures, like that of the Pyramid of the Niches (which was not Olmec).
I'd just like to quote a review of Wiercinski's work, because its quality really speaks for itself:
To determine the racial heritage of the ancient Olmecs, Dr. Wiercinski (1972b) used classic diagnostic traits determined by craniometric and cranioscopic methods. These measurements were then compared to a series of three crania sets from Poland, Mongolia and Uganda to represent the three racial categories of mankind.
Which American and African religions are actually being discussed? Egyptian religion was definitely not the same as religion in Western Africa, nor was Aztec religion at all related to the tribes of the Pacific Northwest.
Nunez de Balboa's visit to the Americas was in 1552. Spaniards had been transporting African slaves to the Americas for roughly half a century by that point. It's not entirely improbable that some escaped and were seen. This was certainly a common occurrence later.
I'm not sure how stylized stone heads can be "clearly crafted in the likeness of Africans", considering the diversity of appearances on that continent. This says more about the author's preconceptions than anything else.
Interestingly, I'd never heard of this particular theory before. It appears to be a variation on the Lake Tritonis idea. Unfortunately, the desertification of the Sahara precedes the evolution of humans and Lake Chad has never extended into Egypt. Similarly, the idea that African traders introduced cotton to the Americas is... amusing. Genetic evidence indicates the American and Afroeurasian genuses diverged around a million years ago.^1 In order for this timeline to make sense, we'd either have to rewrite essentially everything we know about human evolutionary history or concede that Cotton is probably native to the Americas.
^1 Wendel, J. F., & Cronn, R. C. (2003). Polyploidy and the evolutionary history of cotton. Advances in agronomy, 78, 139-186.
I only know bits and pieces about this, mainly relating to Musa I of Mali. He was a King whose predecessor had sailed into the Atlantic with a large fleet(supposedly more than a thousand ships) to see what was beyond the water. A previous fleet had gone ahead and only one ship had returned, saying that the rest were lost in a giant whirlpool.
This answer by /u/Reedstilt is far more detailed and gives a good overview of the question. It won't counter all of the claims in your article, but most of those are more cases of choosing a theory and then finding things that fit it, such as the appearance of pyramids in both the Americas and Africa. Coincidentally, that was explained a week or two back by someone else here as a logical building development of a basic shape(a triangle).
