I asked for arguments, not a bunch of wild claims. Do you understand the difference?
I'll only bother responding to the questions and things actually resembling arguments, rather than baseless claims.
How is it we have mysteriously "lost the technology" to go to the moon?
There is nothing mysterious about it.
Why have we "lost the technology" to build the pyramids?
Why have we "lost the technology" to do so many things?
The equipment required to go to the moon was highly specialised, with none of the infrastructure to build it, and the people involved moved on.
Why has no human left low earth orbit in 50 years?
Why should they?
What is the purpose of putting humans above low Earth orbit?
What can humans achieve by going out, which can't be achieved (often better) by machines, with the risk of loss of human life?
Given the pace of technology, we should have bases on the moon and have visited Mars by now.
No, we shouldn't.
3. The photographs NASA presents of the Apollo missions are filled with internal inconsistencies. (Part 1)
— Shadows of two objects in the same photo go in two different directions (showing stage lighting) even though there was only one light source available (the sun).
You mean shadows along different surfaces, i.e. surfaces with different elevations, appear to go in different directions, due to the different terrain.
Backlit photos (i.e, photos shot into the sun) show foreground detail that would be impossible to see in a legitimate photo
There is nothing impossible about it.
The ground scatters light. This allows objects to be seen, even when lit from behind.
This is done all the time on Earth. And while Earth does have an atmosphere, most comes from the ground and objects nearby.
Well, presenting the evidence that NASA offers and critially examining it is exactly the approach used in the documentary.
Yet you don't provide anything from NASA.
I want it from NASA, not from some conspiracy nut who could happily manipulate it to pretend there are problems.
I have seen this before on youtube, where to try to claim that the ISS is filmed on a set they showed an astronaut fading out as they go through a doorway. What they didn't tell you is that in looping the video they used a fade effect, and the video was looped as the astronaut left, making them appear to fade out as well.
The entire argument was based upon the editing the conspiracy nut did.
Likewise, on this forum, one poster was great at producing fake photos by combining different photos, to pretend there is a problem.
So people "presenting the evidence NASA offers and critically examining it" is indistinguishable from "fabricating evidence to pretend there is a problem and blatantly lying about it" without the actual evidence from NASA from a reliable source.
If they were honest, they would provide links to the actual source, to easily allow others to go and look at the original themselves.
Your source is not reliable, so anything they present is not reliable. Them claiming it is from NASA doesn't mean it is. Provide the actual evidence from NASA.
And then provide the actual argument yourself, not just linking to some crappy video.
And instead of just spamming a bunch of claims, pick one, and actually justify it.