His beliefs are irrelevant. His argument was not about his beliefs or about "I am" but that John's Gospel was interpolated and he gives concrete, verifiable data, to support his claim. If you think his data are flawed, please provide evidence showing all the concrete examples he lists are wrong.
His flaws are beyond my desire to expound on. Many have commented on the Gospel of John, and many of them find peculiar sequencing. Some even suggest he is telling a THEOLOGICAL story....gasp....rather than a CHRONOLOGICAL story.
That, however, only heightens the rationale behind Alamo’s insistence that “I am” is used by Jesus in John to call attention to His Divine nature.