You go to great lengths to sell the absurd but it's not working. My senses know a leaf when I see it, and know coffee when I smell it, the color blue, the feel of sandpaper. Are these illusions or are they real? My senses tell me that the particulars in my world are real. My senses (which have great empirical evidential value) say these things are real, so your statement is silly. What do your senses tell you? Are you now going to say that I have no way of knowing if these objects are illusions? Go ahead - the fact will remain that my senses tell me that they are real. That is the preponderance of evidence I was referring to - sensory evidence. Can't argue with that pal. I'll bet you look both ways before crossing the street, don't you? Sure you do - you know that oncoming car is real, eh.
So you do actually believe we'd be more, um, faded looking if we existed because someone (or God) dreamed us up? And where was the proof you were going to offer up? If I were whipping up a good illusion of reality, don't you think I'd take the trouble to condition your mind, when I created it, to convince you everything was really real?
I think you're the one whose been sucking up his ontological philosophy from hollywood movies. Just because pseudo-reality has more glitches than a dog has fleas in a hollywood movie like "Matrix" does not make that a blueprint for the solution to a problem that's stumped the best players in the philosophy game for going on 200 years.