CNN has an article which raises this very question. The question is raised, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, because researchers manipulated chicken embryos so that they would grow with the snout of a Velociraptor. The report by scientists at Yale published in Evolution in September 2019, and summarized in this Popular Science article reveals that by introducing an inhibitor to stop the genetic signal that tells the embryo to build a bird beak, the scientists were able to make the chicken embryos grow a snout and palate that resembles a velociraptor.
Most of the public probably imagine a velociraptor from the Jurassic Park movies, which were probably representations of Deinonychus, a genus of dromaeosaurid theropod dinosaur with one described species, Deinonychus antirrhopus. This species, which could grow up to 3.4 metres (11 ft) long, lived during the early Cretaceous Period, about 115–108 million years ago. As noted in this article actual velociraptors were more like a turkey with teeth. A turkey is not what the movie makers thought would be a scary predator.
Speculating what the meat tasted like is fleshed out (sorry!) in this article, which given that velociraptors were meat eaters themselves, probably means their meat would be like a cross between turkey meat and eagle or hawk meat i.e. gamey and tough.
What is more interesting to me is that the chicken genes could be manipulated in embryo to grow a snout like a velociraptor. That to me, is very strong evidence that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
As birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs, many of their features were modified. Small theropods related to Compsognathus (e.g., Sinosauropteryx) probably evolved the first feathers. These short, hair-like feathers grew on their heads, necks, and bodies and provided insulation. In theropods even more closely related to birds, like the oviraptorosaurs, we find several new types of feathers. One is branched and downy. Others have evolved a central stalk, with unstructured branches coming off it and its base. Still others (like the dromaeosaurids and Archaeopteryx) have a vane-like structure in which the barbs are well-organized and locked together by barbules. This is identical to the feather structure of living birds.
Another line of evidence comes from changes in the digits of the dinosaurs leading to birds. The first theropod dinosaurs had hands with small fifth and fourth digits and a long second digit. As the evogram above shows, in the theropod lineage that would eventually lead to birds, the fifth digit (e.g., as seen in Coelophysoids) and then the fourth (e.g., as seen in Allosaurids) were completely lost. The wrist bones underlying the first and second digits consolidated and took on a semicircular form that allowed the hand to rotate sideways against the forearm. This eventually allowed birds’ wing joints to move in a way that creates thrust for flight.
The bone walls became even thinner, and the feathers became longer and their vanes asymmetrical, probably also improving flight. The bony tail was reduced to a stump, and a spray of feathers at the tail eventually took on the function of improving stability and maneuverability. The wishbone, which was present in non-bird dinosaurs, became stronger and more elaborate, and the bones of the shoulder girdle evolved to connect to the breastbone, anchoring the flight apparatus of the forelimb. The breastbone itself became larger, and evolved a central keel along the midline of the breast which served to anchor the flight muscles. The arms evolved to be longer than the legs, as the main form of locomotion switched from running to flight, and teeth were lost repeatedly in various lineages of early birds.
Air sacs and pneumatic bones in birds – the bronchi of the respiratory system extend beyond the lungs into air sacs which in turn extend into many long bones. These air sacs aid flight by: reducing the bird’s weight. There is strong evidence that theropod dinosaurs that predated the emergence of birds in the record had pulmonary systems like modern bird breathing systems. This means that the flow-through lung is not unique to birds, but was present in theropod dinosaurs before the evolution and emergence of birds. See this article for example.
Now all that I just recounted is circumstantial evidence. That evidence provides a plausibility pathway of evolutionary development that coincides with the timeline in history in which we find the fossil evidence. Because this is historical evidence, it can only be inference to the most probable conclusion, like any forensic study. Fans of crime dramas and police shows know the difference between direct evidence tying a suspect to the murder, like fingerprints on the murder weapons, DNA of the suspect on the victim, and so on, and circumstantial evidence that points to the suspect but does not prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Creationist like to exploit the distinction between circumstantial and direct evidence to argue that the similarities are merely coincidental, the result of common design rather than common descent. See here for example and here for instance. But the Yale experiments seems to rewind evolution, showing the genetic development from dinosaur snout to bird beaks exists in the chicken DNA. Why, if you inhibit the beak development in embryo, does what develop precisely resemble the supposed ancestor? Because the theropods WERE the actual ancestors seems the direct evidence conclusion.
Here is Answers-in-Genesis’ attempt to throw shade on the Yale study. About the best they can say is:
To achieve a targeted embryonic defect like this, even one that so loosely and imperfectly resembles the bone structure of another sort of animal, required an enormous amount of research and experimentation. Insertion of the correct inhibitors at the correct spot in the embryo at precisely the right time in its development to inhibit specific genetic expression and achieve the desired effect was not accomplished through random processes.
In other words, the researchers had to work so hard to achieve the effect there is no way it could have happened naturally. Hmmm… I wonder what crow tastes like.