Introduction Interpreting information is a rather complicated process. Statistical data are to be properly analyzed and structured to be interpreted. The same is true about historical data. To assure the proper data interpretation, the human thought have developed lots of concepts and hypothesis and means of it, and one of them is the so-called Simpson’s Paradox (Graff & Birkenstein, 2007, pp. 5 – 8). The aim of this paper is to examine the essence of the Simpson’s Paradox and its role in the interpretation of information. Another purpose of this work is to consider the possible implementation of the Simpson’s Paradox to the events that took place at Nuclear Tests Sites in Nevada, and namely the events that happened to the cast of the film “The Conqueror” by Howard Hughes. I am going to consider Simpson’s Paradox in the context of those events so that to see its practical use. Simpson’s Paradox The very paradox bears the name of Edward H. Simpson who formulated it in 1951 but did not think that his theory would amount to such a worldwide known paradox. The very term “Simpson’s Paradox” was developed much later, in 1972, by Colin R. Blyth. Drawing from this, numerous scholars avoid calling it “Simpson’s Paradox” and use the term “reversal paradox” instead. But, in any case, the essence of the phenomenon remains the same independent of the term which is used to call it. The authorship of the theory also can not be doubted because it was Simpson who discovered the phenomenon, while Blyth only named it after him (Clifford, 1982, pp. 46 – 48). Simpson’s Paradox is a statistical phenomenon according to which a result which is typical of several separate groups of people, things, phenomena, etc. acquires completely different meaning when these separate groups are combined. Thus, for example, the rate of recovery which is observed in patients that undergo treatment is higher than the rate of recovery in patients who do not undergo treatment. But, at further consideration, it may turn out that the rate of recovery of treated males is lower than in untreated ones. The same can turn out to be true about the female patients who, respectively, undergo and do not undergo treatment. But, the above presented paradigm is mistaken in its essence because the sum of elements can not contradict their separate meanings. In other words, if female treated patients have higher rate of recovery that those who were not treated, and treated males have higher recovery rate than untreated ones as well, than the recovery rate of overall treated patients can not be lower than the one of untreated patients (Clifford, 1982, pp. 46 – 48). Thus, the Simpson’s Paradox can be used to explain to controversial phenomena. On the one hand, it describes and explains the mistake interpretation of information based on the failing criterion. On the other hand, it considers the improper use of information and its inaccurate analysis due to which the conclusions made from the information about single whole can contradict the conclusions made from information about its parts. Use of the Simpson’s Paradox is a great chance for scientists to interpret the information in a right way and not to allow its misinterpretation (Clifford, 1982, p