I suspect your series of photographs is in no way a precise measurement, unless you happen to be employing surveying techniques.

Whatever the case, even were it an exercise in geometry, that is not an indication of temperature. At best it could be a correlate, because the glacial systems are governed by far more than just temperature. For instance they move through gravity alone without need for the intercession of temperature change.

A motion could easily be perceived as a change in size, and such motion may well be visible over a 25 year span.

Also I'm less interested in exploring the simple direct facts of your assertions than the attitudes and axioms that surround them, hence my tangential approach.

We could go back and forth simply contradicting each other, but that doesn't seem so amusing or illuminating to me as a dialectic analysis of the philosophy these propositions are swimming in.