Living in Vegas, I get a chance to visit the many Lik Galleries on the strip and see the prints first hand. Just from those visits I can see that Mr. Lik has no apprehension in heavy post-processing.
I think some of his other works are also composites or significant alterations to the image - One example - his "Timeless Land" shot - http://www.lik.com/thework/canyons-arches/timelessland.html
. The La Sals are just too magnified, too peaked; or too stretched against the reality. Now perhaps its a super long lens but then I can not see how the arch would fill the frame in the natural way it does. The focal lengths just dont match.
Perhaps with "Bella Luna" he variably stretched the moon to get rid of the distortion. But the other cues - the lighting, the rim, the positioning - all point to composite.
I can't say I am bothered by the manipulation as a Peter Lik image - its the core of entertainment. But I would be bothered if one of his fans insisted it was one godlike shot - and that may be the unfortunate result of the narrative - the story invites an unfair comparison against those who produce more natural images.