First of all, Scientific American is not nearly the quality science magazine it once was. While it once had articles written by the actual scientists and was directed to giving accurate information, it is now a popular science magazine that is written primarily by journalists. In the goal to make money, it destroyed itself.Yet as natural as this way of thinking is, you will not find it reflected in science. The equations of physics do not tell us which events are occurring right nowthey are like a map without the you are here symbol. The present moment does not exist in them, and therefore neither does the flow of time. Additionally, Albert Einsteins theories of relativity suggest not only that there is no single special present but also that all moments are equally real [see That Mysterious Flow, by Paul Davies; Scientific American, September 2002]. Fundamentally, the future is no more open than the past.
More to the point. In modern physics, space and time together become part of the dynamic geometry of the universe. Both space and time are affected by and affect matter and energy, so they become real quantities that have to be addressed. But, spacetime comes as a whole: all of space and all of time are together in this geometry. No 'right now', as your article says.
This does not mean that time is merely a construct of our minds. In fact, the evidence says that time and space are quite physical things that are crucial parts of our universe.
If you really want to continue this discussion, you should learn some actual physics. You will find that time is a fundamental part of our universe. Even those who think that space and time are emergent from other phenomena (suggested by the first part of your post), see time as a physical thing whose properties need to be explained.