Comment 4 by Cartomancer :

While it is my perennial and familiar idiom, idiolect if you will, to favour a species of pretentious, verbose loquacity in such communicative perambulations as I figure to essay, the logorrhoic evulsions that this modus operandi repeatedly leads me to confect can arrogate to themselves a humdrum, nay, quotidian aspect redolent of the tritest and most somniferous of Francophone fin de siecle ennui. Such undisciplined periphrasis is sophomoric in extremis. It is Antediluvian in its pretentiousness. Deleterious. Anathema to clarity and productive only of fatuous and extended lucubrations to the realisation of no objectively enriching telos whatsoever. The insertion of lexical items drawn, mutatis mutandis or otherwise, from the vocabularies of exotic, prestigious and pre-modern tongues is particularly extraneous, egregious and conducive to a mien of that most dolorous Weltschmerz characteristic of the teutonic gentes. We must be manumitted from its incarceration with all decent celerity, pursuant to the recognition of contradistinctions inherent in the conceptual haeresis between the logos and the simulacrum - the essential division it behoves us to predicate juxtaposing that which facilitates the liberal uptake of fundamental essence and cognition against that which merely beautifies, adorns, ornaments or distracts from such a salutarily alembic cranial endeavour.

Nonsense. Everyone knows the flood was just a myth.

Actually, this sort of reminds me of the way Nixon used to send Spiro Agnew out to beat the Washington press corps over the head with his dictionary. "Nattering nabobs of negativity" and the like.