I remember reading about the planeria study. It turned out that there was a tertiary effect doing the work. The scientists weren't fully cleaning the maze between trials, and the new planeria were simply following the trail left by the ones before. (More on that from Straight Dope:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mflatworm.html)
This thread is a great example of how pseudo-science works. First, an unlikely claim is made with some supporting evidence. Next, those who like the idea help it spread like wildfire. Then, once the original research is peer-reviewed, the truth comes out. But, of course, pseudo-scientists don't usually subscribe to peer-reviewed journals, and so the corrected information is not disseminated.
That's not to fault you, NoSoup. I'm simply pointing out that we all need to be careful to check the sources from which we receive our data. If it was in
Nature, then it's probably true. If it was in
FATE, then you may want to double check it.