A peer-reviewed "paper that we have been to the moon" is a straw man born of exceptional ignorance. You don't get published just for announcing a self-evident fact, and certainly it does not require peer review just to say that.
Instead we can certainly show you the mountain of peer-reviewed literature covering various facets of Apollo science and engineering. The list of just the titles of the geology research papers runs to something like 20 pages. As for the engineering, there were entire conferences held in the aeronautics and astronautics fields on such things as guidance, propulsion, electronics design, control systems, etc. All this literature rests upon the premise that Apollo was genuine. A "peer-reviewed paper" addressing alleged fraudulence in Apollo is not forthcoming, nor ever will be. Why? Because the notion that Apollo was faked is so absolutely ludicrous among actual scientists and engineers that it doesn't get serious mention. It's on par, in those well-informed circles, with saying that the Earth is flat or that trees are responsible for snow. The conspiracy crowd needs to get it in their heads that their rants have no visibility beyond their YouTube cliques.
