I see Eliezer as making arguments about the worst ways things could go wrong and why it’s not guaranteed that they won’t go that way.
Eliezer believes and argues that things go wrong by default, with no way he sees to avoid that. Not just “no guarantee they won’t go wrong”.
It may be that his arguments are sufficient to convince you of “no guarantee they won’t go wrong” but not to convince you of “they go wrong by default, no apparent way to avoid that”. But that’s not what he’s arguing.
Eliezer believes and argues that things go wrong by default, with no way he sees to avoid that. Not just “no guarantee they won’t go wrong”.
It may be that his arguments are sufficient to convince you of “no guarantee they won’t go wrong” but not to convince you of “they go wrong by default, no apparent way to avoid that”. But that’s not what he’s arguing.