But I am not yet convinced that anyone has a model that can tell us there is no evidence of an attack.
"No evidence" (to me, at least) just means "no evidence". I also have no evidence that I have cancer, yet it is still possible that I have cancer, I just don't have evidence.
No evidence
for nor against (no medical exam), is different than no evidence
for (completed a medical exam). I am positing that we have the former in this case.
Programmers have these sort of very precise logic skills and demarcation of boundaries of logic (compartmentalization and orthogonality), otherwise bugs appear.There isn't going to be any evidence of an attack in where you are looking (time stamps of various miners' blocks compared to each other) simply because it is the wrong type of examination.
Using rpeitila's example you won't find skin cancer from a liver biopsy. Whether the carefully chosen example from the block chain is anomalous or not, is not going to help you. It would not show what you are thinking it would show. Please waste no more of your time on this?
This entire dialog on this line of inquiry probably has BCX shooting Stoli through nostrils with hilarity for all the time and emotion wasted on it.
What's more silly?
Even if the chosen example is very rare, and only occurs once a week, there have been a couple weeks of data from which to pull such an example since the initial threat.