What Earl did is known as 'concern trolling'. It is where something without data to support it is put out there as a question when it really comes across as idea pushing, without supporting evidence. This is very common on the internet and media nowadays. I am not saying Earl intended it in that way, but that is effectively what the OP was.

I flew behind a Collins FD-109 for a lot of years! As great as it was during that time frame, when it came to ILS below 600/quarter mile RVR, I hand flew the aircraft all the way down.
The one thing I have not seen mentioned here is the pilot in the left seat's attitude about "staying" alive, which is just as great as mine, about staying alive and if he has had the proper training over the years to obtain that left seat position, my odds of staying alive are better than with "George".
I am not saying that Cat III landings are not safe, but with all the electronic signals floating around in this atmosphere which the aircraft operate in, there is always that chance that something will interfere with the information needed to land safely.
But the pilot has much more information to make a decision with than the computer, experience, training, instincts, two eye's to evaluate what is happening, and the ability to push the thrust levers up with any doubt about continuing the landing approach.