Is craniometry scientific?

[Token]

Only when associated with genetics and archeology.

[Silver Lining]

It is scientific and it has always been scientific, people here have just no idea what "science" is. They think it's some secret occult thing only some high priests can do by empirical studies. Very wrong.

Craniometry was, however, not the most exact science ever. Mostly because measuring many traits is nearly impossible and could only be approached by "looking" at it (Schauverfahren), so you could essentially measure nose breadth and length, but you could not really objectively classify the overall shape, what is actually a very important feature, probably more than the raw measurements, whose variance overlaps a lot between populations in the first place. But now with 3D scanning and so on you COULD do a lot more, perhaps even become more predictive and informative than CURRENT genetics (it is the phenotype that matters, after all and the genetic interactions are way too complex to ever understand them and to synthesize all those findings, perhaps AI will help someday).
Second problem is that before our modern computers it was very complicated (and expensive) to run statistical analysis on the data, so they only used small sample sizes and very few variables. What they did in the 70s with multivariate methods actually resulted in LESS accurate conclusions (e.g. they claimed that Corded Ware could not be derived from the Kurgan culture) than just "looking and classifying".

[Columella]

It’s a classic method to isolate differences in skulls.
It’s normally used in archeology, paleoarcheology and forensics.