The article is saying that two things that usually tell us when there might be a bad time for the economy, called recession indicators, did not work this time. The first thing is called the LEI and it went up after being down for two years. Some smart people who study these things say there are problems with using these indicators alone to predict a recession. They also say we should look at many other signs besides just one to understand what's happening with the economy. Read from source...

1. The author of the article seems to be in denial of the current economic downturn and tries to downplay its severity by using phrases like "popular recession indicators" and "signal that people have been citing". This implies that he is not taking the situation seriously or acknowledging the valid concerns of those who are warning about a possible recession.
2. The author also seems to be overconfident in his own analysis by stating that it's good to heed the warnings of popular indicators, but only if they are "usually right". This suggests that he is not open to the possibility that this time might be different and that these indicators could be wrong for a variety of reasons.
3. The author does not provide any evidence or data to support his claims that the LEI's recession signal has been off or that it has been reliable in the past. He simply asserts these statements without giving any context or explanation, which makes his argument less convincing and more based on personal opinion rather than facts.
4. The author also seems to be dismissive of other factors that could be contributing to the current economic slowdown, such as rising inflation, supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, and geopolitical tensions. He only focuses on the LEI and its components, which are not enough to explain the complexity of the global economy.
5. The author's tone is somewhat condescending and patronizing towards those who are worried about a recession, as he repeatedly refers to them as "nerds" or "data nerds". This shows that he does not respect their opinions or expertise, and that he thinks he knows better than them.
6. The author ends the article with a vague and unconvincing statement: "it's never smart to rely too heavily on the signal of a single metric." This implies that he is suggesting a more balanced approach, but in reality, he is doing exactly what he criticizes others for doing: relying too much on one indicator (the LEI) and ignoring other possible warning signs.