Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve: Part II

But there is no reason for the nerves fibers which communicate with the larynx to be so routed. You would further need a good reason why all the nerve fibers should be bundled together as the recurrent nerve.If the shortest rail connection between Ottawa and Montreal was via Vancouver, one could hardly justify that design decision by pointing out that some people do in fact want to get off the train at Vancouver.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

While the page deals with the vagus nerve generally, it also discusses its various branches of communication severally. And slevesque's quote is specifically about the recurrent branch of the vagus nerve, it says that right there in the quote.Get your sackcloth and ashes.

Perhaps we're at cross-purposes here.The laryngeal nerve is the name for a bundle of nerve fibers, some of which terminate at the larynx and some of which don't get that far. It doesn't just designate the ones that terminate at the larynx.You're using "laryngeal nerve" to mean the nerve fibers which do terminate at the larynx, but that's not what it means in medical terminology --- it includes those that are part of that whole bundle of nerves but which (for example) terminate at the cardiac plexus. Which slevesque's quote and link should have made clear. That was your mistake. Slevesque's mistake is to treat the existence of this bundle of nerves (the recurrent laryngeal nerve) as though its existence was somehow inevitable, rather than just being a term we've adopted to describe the facts as we've found them. Under that assumption there is a good reason why the recurrent laryngeal nerve should go round by the heart --- it needs to connect with the cardiac plexus. But then of course the specific nerve fibers which connect to the larynx don't need to be part of the recurrent pharyngeal nerve.Does that straighten things out? (So to speak.)

Of course, unlike evolution, a design hypothesis does not explain why the various bits of the body start off in the wrong places and then have to migrate to the right ones.Also, like slevesque, you have taken the existence of the particular bundle of nerve fibers known as the RLN as a given. So you write: "In addition, the laryngeal branch splits up into other branches before entering the larynx at different levels. These many RLN branches serve several other organs with both motor and sensory branches" ... without asking why the particular nerve fibers that serve the larynx couldn't just have gone straight to the larynx.These considerations would doubtless have occurred to you if you'd spent half a minute thinking about anatomy instead of spending five seconds stealing.

Yes. It makes some poor unfortunate people pretend that an obvious botch job is the work of an omniscient God. We've done that. The routing of the RLN makes perfect sense for fish, where it goes in direct route. Adaptations of vertebrate anatomy gave it a circuitous route in tetrapods. And a target painted on your foot. And as I pointed out, you then need a reason for the developmental constraints, which we have and you don't. Same way as usual. Maybe this will enlighten you. Now, perhaps you could provide an explanation of how God made the RLN by magic.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

If you really don't know what the theory of evolution is, there are books about it. Nope, no details. Your command of syntax is equaled only by your grasp of biology.