“The decision has reopened a long-simmering tension between researchers in science-based anthropological disciplines — including archaeologists, physical anthropologists and some cultural anthropologists — and members of the profession who study race, ethnicity and gender and see themselves as advocates for native peoples or human rights.”
Neither branch is science-based. If they just stuck to observation they could call it science, but they have all sorts of ideas which can’t be tested, verified, or falsified.
As an field archaeologist, I find your broad statement that archaeology isn’t science amusing. It is very important to use the same scientific methodology as a chemist or physicist. The field of anthropology itself has been hijacked in the 80s and 90s by lefty loons the same as when the Nazi’s in the 30s used it to promote and projects its agenda. Yes it does sully the reputation of the field but does not diminish the nature of the study. Conjecture and bias, just like in “climate change studies” does not change how the science is performed, just how the findings are displayed.