Anthropology is not a beacon of the scientific method, no. The "hypothesis driven" nature of the field is about as hypothesis driven as literature analysis. If you are treating the process of "I have a hypothesis, I look for evidence, and I find it" as scientific, then History and English are sciences too. The difference that makes a science is that the process of looking for evidence is about systematically trying to falsify your hypothesis - and once there are no alternative explanations left, you have a good theory about what is going on. Anthropology, literature studies, history, and even "harder" disciplines of social science (like linguistics and several other kinds of psychology) don't really work this way. They can produce useful knowledge, sure, but that doesn't make them sciences.

As to the other fields you mentioned, all of them are engineering disciplines, which are very different than sciences. Engineering is about producing useful work from the results of science. The results that those particular disciplines use largely come from psychology.