In my reading of the article, I never detected a suggestion that Darwinian evolution was flawed or incorrect. In fact, as far as I can tell, the article says ex

In my reading of the article, I never detected a suggestion that Darwinian evolution was flawed or incorrect. In fact, as far as I can tell, the article says exactly what you're saying: that a complete understanding of evolution involves understanding that both evolutionary and epigenetic forces are at play. In other words, the template changes, but so does the expression of that template. In fact, the summary paragraph in the article says we need to add epigenetics to Darwinian evolution, just as you say these newer ideas "fit squarely on top" of Darwin's.