What I often tell students is there is one question just as important as "What is true?" And that is: "Why are you asking?"
While most of what we understand about the authors of Scripture is based on critical theory and thus subject to change as we gather more data and understand it better, we do have a clear conclusions made by sound methodology and agreed consensus.
In Judaism we have something called "argument for the sake of heaven" meaning debate between sages for the sake of finding a right answer or solution. There is also "argument for sake of victory" which one does with an opponent just to win a battle for the sake of pride.
When there are sound answers based on sound, proven critical methods, one should employ them. If one does not trust them, one should learn the methods used to arrive at the answers. Many scholars and academics over many generations often worked hard to arrive at finding the solution they have provided, 'arguing for the sake of heaven,' so to speak.
But one cannot come to a solution on their own. A critical answer is not a critical answer if it is not tested by independent and disinterested parties and then the work approved and accepted by consensus. Otherwise it is just a personal opinion. When you stick to this view and worse, try to promote it view debate, it is an "argument for the sake of pride."
There are many possible solutions to who wrote Daniel but there is also a general consensus on the matter based on a very sound critical methodology. In fact, there is almost no tradition whatsoever used for Daniel's authorship. It comes from Judaism and is highly critical of both the religion, the history of my people, and the history of the Hasmoneans themselves.
For many exJWs this is not easy. Trust in authority is not something they are likely to do a second time in life, even if it comes from a "trusted source," or especially if it comes from a so called "authorized" source. Most I've talked to from the Watchtower do not avail themselves of mainstream materials but cling to something or more often someone with a particular unique idea. They seem to identify with the independent over the learned, and I don't blame them when the Governing Body lied to them by claiming they were learned and authorized though they were neither.
Also learning the various methods is not something that is simple without personal experience. Sometimes taught in primary educational systems, it usually isn't found until secondary, and most Jehovah's Witnesses aren't ever taught how it is done, especially in reference to Biblical studies.
Instead of inventing the wheel, I can only offer the advice of finding out for yourself why you are searching for answers that already have a consensus. Why are you not satisfied with what is out there? If it is because you are a learned scholar, I understand. But you would not be here. Academics don't learn in a vacuum. Scholars have jobs with schools and academies, etc. You learn with other academics.
Only you you can answer this question. You can't find the answers you need until this one gets settled.
