I am more hesitant to draw anyone's conclusions for them. RWP called it "evolution-plus" and I think that's as good a term as any.
Do you differentiate between Darwin's evolution vs. the conceptualization of evolution in use today?
By your phrasing of the question you limit the answer. You note "the conceptualization". It is singular. It "implies" a monolithic view. Since I do not accept Darwin's evolution I must then differentiate it from this hypothetical monolithic view. But that is unimportant to anyone other than me.
The question is what did the Professor intend? He put some words together to answer you in some fashion. I can see no other interpretation but a rejection, "no-brainer", of this --Do the current concepts of evolution, natural selection, and random mutation explain or account for the diversity of life on this planet? . Something that Darwin "These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with Reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the conditions of life and from use and disuse: a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows." claims to do.
Additionally, the Doctor states in these words "have a lot more blind faith than I do." an observation many people have of Darwinists.