I'm suggesting that science projects which are not original ground-breaking research should not be portrayed in the media as original ground-breaking research.

No but I'm suggesting this isn't nearly as big a deal as people are hyping and that the kid - whilst diligent - ain't a genius.

Nowhere does it suggest that the kid is some kind of genius. Not in the original article, nor in these threads. It's clear that this was a school science project and that he was encouraged by his teachers (and his reviewers) to pursue it.

The fact that it's considered newsworthy enough ("man bites dog" & all that) to merit a CNN story is itself the claim that this is somehow novel or interesting.

It's the same objection you'd have if CNN posted a story about "kid uses physical model to predict lava distribution from volcano using baking soda and vinegar".

Also "of the nearly 200 submissions they have received since 2011, Suvir's project was a real standout"

Fair point - it doesn't actually mention the word "genius".