I deduce from what you wrote that you're not a pilot, nor that you have studied the video from the flying simulation rig that Aldrin and Armstrong trained on to land the LM. The final thrust percentage was high most of time. From what I saw, they rarely would have gotten an actual LM down safely. IIRC, I believe the last terrestrial trial before the Apollo 11 mission resulted in an ejection, parachute landing and demolished rig.
But even if the LM were to have used the 12.2% final thrust that someone has fed you, any thoughtful person should realize that it necessarily would have disturbed more than a few grams of regolith mere inches below the engine nozzle! The image shows no disturbance whatsoever, but something is blocking you. Inculcated disdain for me, perhaps? I think it likely that it's the faux religion to which you've given yourself over.
If and when you realize that you've listened to and placed your confidence in the Deep State's quasi-religious bishops and their stooge media handlers, all on a nearly infinite payroll (i.e., they're mercenaries, bought-and-paid-for), instead of paying attention to supremely talented, unbiased men of principle that have accomplished truly great things and are responsible for the many great things in our modern world, perhaps a glint of truth may dawn on you.
To such a world of hateful, cancel-culture insulters it is that you seem to have chosen to belong!
Nonetheless, I wish you well.
For example, you note the DPS maximum thrust of 10,000 lbs. Its really 10,125 lbf, but close enough. You used that as a basis for your argument of "no blast crater, therefore a hoax". But you either deliberately or unknowingly failed to mention that that variable thrust of the DPS, which was very low close to the surface because of LM mass reduction (fuel use) and the fact that most of the orbital velocity had been shed by the long braking burn at higher thrust. Further, you demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the behavior of exhaust gases in an airless environment. There is a pronounced dispersion of the exhaust stream (plume, if you could see it, but you can't, for other reasons). Like many conspiracy theorists who use the "no blast crater" meme, you seem to have a picture of the exhaust as a kind of blowtorch effect, with a hot central cone and cooler envelope surrounding it. It is not that way. The dispersion reduces the force experienced by the underlying soil. There is an outward spray of dust as the LM approaches landing, which is clear in almost all of the films made of the landing phase, but upon touchdown there is no "blast" or digging effect. There is no "dust on the footpads" effect because the dust that is disturbed blows radially outward. It does not billow upward like you see dust do on Earth. The Earth (and Mars, and probably Venus) have billowing dust because of the swirling motion of the atmosphere. There is no lunar atmosphere, so no billowing effect, just sheets of soil shooting out radially away from the engine, which is exactly as it should be.
You correctly note that Neil Armstrong had to eject from the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle, and you incorrectly extrapolate that to an inability to control the actual LM in flight. You neglect to point out the real cause of the accident, which was a loss of helium pressure that caused depletion of the hydrogen peroxide used for the reserve attitude thrusters, and lack of instrumentation in the LLRV cockpit to show this condition to the pilot. The actual LM design had multiple sensors to show the status of the DPS pressure, as well a sufficient reserve capacity to keep the helium pressure stable in the LM attitude control system.
I don't know you, so it would be illogical for me to harbor any personal disdain. I just think that you're hitching your wagon to a purely speculative and imaginative hoax theory, and are clearly in over your head when discussing this with people whose are more knowledgeable in the basic science of the subject.