As far as the idea of pi being 3, that is exactly what pi was considered to be in ancient times. The Babylonians considered the circumference of a circle to be three times the diameter, ie that pi equals 3. So did the Roman Vitruvius, one of the founders of architecture as a science. By 1800 BC the Egyptians had pi to 3.1604, but it was not until 1789 that pi was proven to be an irrational number, and 1882 that it was proven to be what is termed a transcendental number, by Lambert and Lindemann respectively. It seems shortsighted of us today to make fun of people in the past for believing what everyone then believed, even their contemporary mathematicians.
The theory that the Bible was told and retold orally for centuries before it was written down, although widely believed, seems odd if you think about it. Writing was quite common in the ancient world, widely used by the public at large and taught in school to children as a matter of course at least as far back as the third millenia BC. The city of Akkad, scene of the first "empire" of history, was also known as Sippar, which means "scribe town." Excavations, starting with the first in Sumeria by Rich, Botta, and Layard found tablets and inscriptions at every site. This has continued to the present.
Moses was raised as a prince in the house of Pharoah, at a time when writing had been in use for thousands of years, and he was educated at the court. He then lived in an area of southern Arabia where writing is known to have been common for centuries. If he felt what he was doing was important, can we rationally believe he didn't have it all written down?
As for transitional forms in fossils, sorry frizzy, but nothing has been found to support the quotes you cite. Wikipedia's not much of a source, except for pop culture. Try some of these books:
Collin Patterson, the Listener (Patterson has retired as head paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History- his book is probably the one you should start with);
Salet, Hasard et al, Certitude: le Transformisme devant la Biologie Actuelle;
B. Leith, the Descent of Darwin;
N. MacBeth, Darwin Retried;
Stephen Jay Gould, the Panda's Thumb;
H. Nielson, Synthetische Artbilding;
Luther Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma;
well, I could list a couple dozen more just to start with, and a long selection of articles from mainstream and specialized scientific publications, many involving paleontology and archaeology, but that'll do to get you started. You may not recognize the names some of these authors, but if you don't recognize Gould and Patterson you probably don't really know this field very well. Oh, and check out the centennial edition of Origin of the Species, the one with the introduction by Thompson, or the 1971 edition with the introduction by L. H. Matthews.
This discussion seems to have degenerated into nothing but opinions, usually set forth with no regard to proof or courtesy, which seems useless in terms of learning anything.