|MadSci Network: Evolution|
To a large extent I would say that the answer to your question is "no." But that would have to be a qualified "no." If we go back to "On the Origin of Species" we find that Darwin realized that somehow traits of the parents were influencing the traits of offspring. He suspected that the correlation was due to some manner of inheritance, but he came to this conclusion without any knowledge of genetics, which had yet to be discovered back in 1859. So the use of the tools of molecular biology has allowed scientists to flesh out Darwin's ideas with molecular details. That being said, perusal of the major evolutionary biology journals will indicate that most of the questions being asked are not that far removed from points raised in "Origin." Most investigations are still concerned with documenting how population and environmental processes influence the physical makeup (be it gene frequencies, femur lengths, brain mass, etc.) of individuals over multiple generations. The population parameters being assayed, such as effective population size, migration rates, mating biases, and others, were all discussed by Darwin. The use of molecular assays and the data they provide has brought to this field the ability to investigate evolutionary questions at very detailed levels. One area of investigation that would not exist without molecular biology is the study of rates of mutation and substitution. This field got its start when protein polymorphism was first assayed in starch gels and remarkable levels of polymorphism were found. This, when connected with information about how DNA codes for proteins, led to the concept of neutral mutation and instigated the Selection vs. Neutrality debate that has raged on and off for the past ~40 years. Neutral evolution wasn't an entirely new concept, however, as Darwin did realize that many of the changes seen between generations were not necessarily under the influence of natural selection.
Try the links in the MadSci Library for more information on Evolution.