Fair enough, I tend to think along those lines as well. I will argue by evidence and logic
for pragmatic things. However, I can only appeal to logic and you're own experience for things that fall outside of this..
Time is an interesting case. Have you read Schopenhauer's view on this and Russell's (post mortem!) rebuttal? I think Russell is arguing simply that time is not as a colour - made up entirely in our heads. Again, this is to rebut Schopenhauer's conclusion about time. I do not know if that is your view or even if it has a modern ideational consonance..
Neither do I think he (Russell) is comfortable with the suggestion that things only have realities because we impart it to them. I believe the idea is that there is something that is not us that we funnel through us to make it compatible with 'what we are' (ultimately that would be, as I see it, largely for survival). But that thing that we 'change' or co-adopt? into us does have a separate reality, we just can't know it. That last bit I suppose is a belief.
However, it's possible I suppose that we have evolved to percept the universe 'as it really is' (we are, after, all, made of universe stuff) but due to the 'imperfect' processes of evolution, we haven't quite got there (yet? - probably not!) - a point capable of understanding the full reality. For now , we currently distort to some degree what we perceive, but are still 'grabbing some of its 'reality'. True or not? Who knows?
In any case, at this ontological level, we cannot know any of this. It is all speculation - but lots of fun..