FWIW, NOAA's Sea Level Rise map says there needs to be a 2'-3' rise to noticeably affect their property, and probably 5' to affect the house. (House is at https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3607964,-70.5465745,146m/dat... .)

https://sealevel.nasa.gov/ipcc-ar6-sea-level-projection-tool says it will take about 100 years to get to the 1 meter sea level rise for that area.

They'll be long dead.

Or to spin it another way, they are hopeful that people will respond to the dire predictions, stop contributing to global warming, and as a result sea level rise won't exceed about a 1 meter.

I wonder what the correlation is between their dire predictions, and the actuality of sea level changes where they live?

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.... shows the relative sea level trend for Boston. Eyeballing it, looks like a 10 cm rise in the last 20 years, with no sign of slowing down.

That alone suggests another 40 cm by the end of the century.

Why do you think the predictions are wrong?

I don't think the predictions are wrong. I think the rhetoric is hyperbolic.

Then perhaps I misunderstood.

Michael E. Mann wrote "Dire Predictions: Understanding Global Warming". He lives in Amherst, at about 90 m elevation.

The "the actuality of sea level changes where they live" is zero for him, as there is no sea where he lives, and it would take a very large increase for it to reach him.

How is that data point relevant?