By robust, I mean relying less on subjective judgements (including priors). Could someone assign a much lower probability of such catastrophic risks? Could they be much more skeptical about how much extra work in the area reduces/mitigates these risk (i.e. the progress)?
On the other hand, how much more skeptical could they be of GiveWell-recommended charities, which are based on RCTs? Of course, generalization is always an issue.