Science tells me that its understand of the laws of physics stops at a black hole's singularity? Does that mean I disbelieve the singularity exists because science has no way of describing the singularity?
It means you don't make any factual claims about the nature of the singularity that you can't support with an evidence based model. We can say it exists, because the model we built to fit the actual observations we made predicts that it does. There are no such models that predict the existance of a God.
Superstring theory tells me that 10 dimensions of spacetime exist and bosonic string theory 26. Is it then possible that, if true, we can't (yet? ever?) comprehend events or life that takes place beyond our 3 dimensions of existence or that events from these dimensions can affect the reality of ours?
If the events inside those dimensions affect us, we can measure the effect. So far, all effects measured have followed fairly simple rules, at least on the relevant scales. There's no room for miracles in a world ruled by mathematical physics.
Why is it when we speak of entangled quantum particles separated by billions of miles affecting each other instantaneously as a valid theory
Because there is experimental evidence for quantum entanglement. Just because you find the reasoning incomprehensible doesn't mean that everything incomprehensible is equally valid.
yet the very real experiences a significant amount of humanity have had and can only explain that it was God (does it matter that they call that experience Buddha, Jesus, Marduk, or Zeus?) as ignorant ramblings?
Further, there is no experience any human has had that can only be explained as God. Trancendental experiences are simply altered states of mind, a slightly different configuration of the biological computer in our head. Trancendental experiences are no more evidence of God than schizophrenia is evidence of the devil.
That is, why exactly hasn't religion gone away after all this time?
Because it's a meme with a lot of selective advantages. None of which have to do with it being true.
Personally, I choose to keep a more open mind to possible explanations of reality than Dawkins and (insert religious fundamentalist figurehead here) choose to.
Do you think anyone would have come up with wave particle duality if scientists weren't open minded? We're willing to consider anything, if there's evidence. If there's no evidence, then why waste your time?