Agreed, I don’t understand the concept that 5% of locations are seeing “local” rises in sea level. Like a big hill of water is parked offshore or something.
I don’t understand their way of thinking either...
I think it’s mostly BS...
“local” sea level rise is due to local changes in the level of the land. You know that landmasses rise and fall due to tectonic plate movements, right? So the shoreline of some regions are sinking, leading to “relative” sea level rise. The original article in the Journal of Marine Science and Engineering explains this well. Part of the problem is that reporters do not reliably distinguish between “absolute” and “relative” sea level change. Neither do agenda driven pseudo scientists.
What with tidal effects, an ever moving surface and local weather, such measurements are at best unreliable.