This article and the researcher it quotes seem to use the term "evolution " in a very inclusive manner that is questionable. They mash together proposed genetic physical capabilities and theoretical ideas on behavior. That is not a highly supported way to discuss evolution.
Evolution is a process that is determined by breeding. Many traits get carried in the genetic material that are simply neutral to breeding. Animals carry out varied behavior within a species as long as those variations are breeding neutral. A good example is killer whales where functionally genetically identical killer whales have significantly different hunting behaviors.
Genetic evolution does not cause uniform hunting behavior in modern species and it would take very high evidence to claim it did in past species.

i think the point of this article is very well outlined in the case where it says "Dececchi’s work with dinosaurs has led him to see evolution similarly as a matter of nuance, a process of sculpting, the slow revealing, to him reminiscent of the Michelangelo statues in the Galleria dell’Accademia in Florence" it is not just about how evolution has always been looked at but also points to the possibility of such having been true. Genetic evolution may not influence behaviour but i can propose with the influence of a text like `The Selfish Gene` that some behaviours are transferrable, especially in the case where the T Rex is striving for efficiency.