Yup. They're treating in silico statistics as faithful to real "brain activity", because the network layout the scientists used was a detailed representation of a snapshot of a part of a real mouse brain. Don't worry if the neurons would behave differently than the simulated neurons, or if that could lead to totally different spikes globally, or if the hype irreversibly makes the story go viral and people still believe claims that were never even part of the original test years later because the story was good enough..

Also... "2.3. Topology Organizes Spike Correlations" <- "Energy makes it go!"

@neuroskeptic on twitter is a good source for examples of questionable neuroscience, their blog is http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/