Occam's Cudgel (defying analysis by deliberate over-complication)

Occasionally in my field of study I'll see academic papers which seek to advance the author(s) privately-held beliefs by presenting analyses filled with so many mathematical symbols and equations experts have neither the time nor the interest to verify them. Because they lay unchallenged, laypeople are sometimes induced to accept the author's conclusions without understanding them ("This guy must know what he's writing about!").

What fallacy or manipulative technique is being employed?

(Related is statistical overfitting - drawing needlessly-complicated conclusions from a limited dataset.)