LMAO - I think you've forgotten the original point. It wasn't worth the cost to keep going to the moon. History and science is on my side. If you think winning an debate is running your mouth, not providing any evidence, and forgetting the point, you win. Congrats.
The answer to "why have we not been back to the moon" is informed by the answer to the question "why did we go to the moon in the first place"?
And that wasn't just in the spirit of discovery, it was largely motivated by the cold war. Basically it came down to beating the Russians.
I'll be honest, I'm disappointed we haven't been back in my lifetime, I'm disappointed we don't have a lunar base. But the fact is those things would be crazy expensive and exploration of space has moved on - the ISS, putting Curiosity on Mars. But NASA's budget isn't what it was in the 60s when the space race was in full swing.
http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/NASA-Budget-Federal.svg_.pngTechnology does always move on but as you say that doesn't mean everything gets faster. Concorde was developed in the late 60s and we still don't have any other commercial airliners going at over Mach 1. Going faster is expensive. Basically, F=ma. And you have something to provide that F. So airline technology has moved on in different ways, more comfort, better entertainment systems and so on.
It's unclear why us having not returned to the moon is in some way a smoking gun for flat earth theory. If the claim is that all the missions were faked then they could have just faked more. Actually would be much easier these days with the CGI available. Is the theory that NASA are instead pumping money into faking the ISS instead? Ludicrous really.