1) The hadith is weak
It's narrated by Sayyidina Ibn Mas‘ud, this is THE most reliable narrator in Islam. He's functionally an apostle to Muslims and the great translator of the Quran because Muhammad was illiterate. The chain of transmission is sahih which is the highest grade imaginable. The collection of hadiths it is from is the Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal compiled by Ahmad ibn Hanbal he's a scholar that was a teacher to Al-Bukhari who more or less created the bedrock of Sunni Islam, his work is considered to be second only to the Quran.
2) I only observe the Quran
This is apostasy, by Muslims' own admission the Quran does not work on its own and they lose almost all of their practices and culture without hadiths.
3) They were jinn, this was the night of the jinn.
A complete hallucination, if they were jinn that were crowding around Muhammad like they claim the text would have just said so.
https://sunnah.com/ahmad:1435
Like the above hadith for instance.
The hadiths don't tell a story, they're accounts. The night of the jinn was a separate event that Abdullah was not even present for.
https://sunnah.com/muslim:450a
4) Semantics bullshit
Ride has had a sexual connotation even back then (picrel) and their semantic argument boils down to Muhammad actually giving piggyback rides to Al-Zutt tribals who are often cited to be very lean and have big dicks. Either that or they pile on him for some reason. In any case, he comes back tired and in pain from how much they "rode" him in the end. Muslims will invent 300 definitions for their word for 'ride' and take every context except for the obvious.