No such thing as a vestigial organ, every single organ ever said to be vestigial has later been discovered to have a function. Some of them had very important functions. Organs that do not have a known function at this time, such as the laryngeal nerve, will probably be later discovered to have a function. By laryngeal nerve, I mean the excess wrapping around other organs rather than going straight to it's destination.
The laryngeal nerve wraps around because it serves more than one purpose https://en.wikipedia...aryngeal_nerve. The reason it is circuitous is due to a specific sequential development of the embryo:
“As the recurrent nerve hooks around the subclavian artery or aorta, it gives off several cardiac filaments to the deep part of the cardiac plexus. As it ascends in the neck it gives off branches, more numerous on the left than on the right side, to the mucous membrane and muscular coat of the esophagus; branches to the mucous membrane and muscular fibers of the trachea; and some pharyngeal filaments to the Constrictor pharyngis inferior.”
... there are features that are the result of embryonic development—not because of evolution, but because the embryo develops from a single cell in a certain order. For example, the embryo needs a functioning simple heart early on; this later descends to its position in the chest, dragging the nerve bundle with it.
What I want to know from the people making this claim is; scientifically speaking, what would be the great benefit to this nerve not being circuitous, or are you just making this argument subjectively in favor of a simpler design (which is shown to be sufficiently simple in the formation of the embryo in said sequential order)? Do we know in depth how this nerve functions, and know for a fact that a more direct route would serve it's function better? I'm all ears.