Anthropology, A subject with plenty of questions without factual answers, it all depends on what we believe.?

Question

Or who theories we side.

Answer 1

Physical Anthropologists know more about human bones and structure than most doctors do.  Primatologists study primate behavior in much the same way as other biologists do.  Cultural Anthropology is more subjective, sure, but when studying people there is a certain about of subjectivity.  

There are plenty of hard, concrete answers in Anthropology.  There are also a lot of theories and speculation, and yes, sometimes it is difficult to conduct experiments to prove your theories. (difficult does not make it impossible, however)  Anthropology is the most scientific of the Humanities, and the most Humane of sciences.

Most theories that even Cultural Anthropologists reason out are based on concrete, observable information.  And generally speaking they acknowledge their own culture and beliefs when they are making these theories.  Anthropologists KNOW their own shortcomings, but it's not just about what they believe.

EDIT:  Very well, if that's what you believe, feel free to provide an example.  Also, if you'd like more information on fossil evidence in the Cambrian period, perhaps you should ask a paleontologist.

Answer 2

Where I hail, we separate biological and cultural anthropology. In biological anthropology, there are many cutthroat anatomists who are much more willing than any creationist to bring down a hypothesis. Any hypothesis that remains must be able to hold water.

Yes there are gray areas, but you are not expected to believe in any conclusion. You should instead agree with them. The difference is that if I believed in a conclusion I would accept it without questioning its evidence for a second. If I agree with it, I accept the merits of its arguments.

Answer 3

No, Anthropology gathers all the pieces of a puzzle & draws upon all available clues.  However, having only part of the puzzle requires the anthropologist to make informed "guesses" as to what the rest of the puzzle might look like. Typically, as soon as he puts his thoughts to paper, some new discovery is made that changes the picture, then he can be made to look like a fool.

Typically the media will print only the sensational parts of a paper & ignore the cautions issued about the unknown parts of the puzzle.

Edit:  J.B. notice I said "informed" guesses about missing pieces of the puzzle.  Any guess is subjected to brutal peer review.  Typically all alternative solutions are listed & discussed prior to the most probable one being picked as the "guess."

Answer 4

It has many answers and does not depend on what you believe. That is the answer that your question seeks.

Precambrian organisms were not hard-shelled, therefore soft and easily decomposed. Therefore, specimens are hard to find.

Any other questions?

Answer 5

I think that the fact that the earth had a whole history/life cycle for a couple of hundred million years with the dinosaurs has never been addressed to my satisfaction by the strict creationists.