A panel of judges is the worst idea because the idea of trial by jury is to be judge by the peers of the community rather than uptight arrogant judges.

Some jurors have even lost their job when a case dragged on for months.

Those employers who nullified someone's job due to jury duty are violating the law.

Due to Federal Statute Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1875, any person serving jury duty is protected against job termination, threat of termination and coercing into losing the job.

Another argumet given is that with increasingly complex forensic evidence, it is becoming difficult to understand what's going on

That is up for the experts, prosecution and defense to provide. It is in both sides best interest to make the jurors understand what the evidence means in a way they can comprehend. If not, they're losing votes for their side.

let alone decide the guilt of the defendant.

Increased accuracy of technological evidence and methods would (on most occasions) make deciding the guilt or innocence of someone easier, not more difficult.

Some of the solutions involve using a panel of judges, or a couple of judges and some experts.

That would be violating the Constitution. And it would defeat the purpose of a trial by peers and the idea that a common person can determine for certain the guilt of an individual.