Geology: Post-glacial rebound, Is this really true?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postglacial_rebound
#begin quote
During the last ice age, much of northern Europe, Asia, North
America, Greenland and Antarctica were covered by ice sheets. The
ice was as thick as three kilometres during the last glacial
maximum about 20,000 years ago. The enormous weight of this ice
caused the surface of the crust to deform and downwarp under the
ice load, forcing the fluid mantle material to flow away from the
loaded area. At the end of the ice age when the glaciers retreated,
the removal of the weight from the depressed land led to uplift or
rebound of the land and the return flow of mantle material back
under the deglaciated area. Due to the extreme viscosity of the
mantle, it will take many thousands of years for the land to reach
an equilibrium level.

Studies have shown that the uplift has taken place in two distinct
stages. The initial uplift following deglaciation was rapid (called
"elastic"), and took place as the ice was being unloaded. After
this "elastic" phase, uplift proceed by "slow viscous flow" so the
rate decreased exponentially after that. Today, typical uplift
rates are of the order of 1 cm/year or less. In northern Europe,
this is clearly shown by the GPS data obtained by the BIFROST GPS
network [1] [1]. Studies suggest that rebound will continue for
about at least another 10,000 years. The total uplift from the end
of deglaciation depends on the local ice load and could be several
hundred metres near the centre of rebound.
#end quote

OK, I guess, but what about:

#begin quote ibidem cont
Since the glacial isostatic adjustment process causes the land to
move relative to the sea, ancient shorelines are found to lie above
present day sea level in areas that was once glaciated. On the
other hand, places in the peripheral bulge area which was uplifted
during glaciation now begins to subside. Therefore ancient beaches
are found below present day sea level in the bulge area. The
“relative sea level data”, which consists of height and age
measurements of the ancient beaches around the world, tells us that
glacial isostatic adjustment proceeded at a higher rate near the
end of deglaciation than today.

The present-day uplift motion in northern Europe is also monitored
by a GPS network called BIFROST[6] [7](Johansson et al. 2002).
Results of GPS data shows that a peak rate of about 11 mm/year
exist in the north part of the Gulf of Bothnia, but this uplift
rate decreases away and become negative outside the former ice
margin.

In the near field outside the former ice margin, the land sinks
relative to the sea. This is the case along the east coast of the
United States, where ancient beaches are found submerged below
present day sea level and Florida is expected to be submerged in
the future (Peltier 1998). GPS data in North America also confirms
that land uplift becomes subsidence outside the former ice margin
(Sella et al. 2007).
#end quote

This is claiming more than a cm/year uplift. That's enough to
notice in a few decades. That's enough to compensate for rising sea
levels in rich northern latitudes while the effects aren't
available for those poor countries in the equatorial areas. But
worse, apparently there is subsidence at similar rates for bulge
areas near the edges of the glacier's max reach. If that's true, I
would think that it would be even more noticeable to folks living
near oceans in these areas.

Are the above numbers true? I haven't had a chance to get to the
original source materials.