To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2006.12.009 Byline: Samuel Schindler Keywords: Data; Phenomena; Bottom-up; Theory-ladenness; Plate tectonic revolution Abstract: In this paper I inquire into Bogen and Woodward's (1988) data/phenomena distinction, which in a similar way to Cartwright's construal of the model of superconductivity (1995) -- although in a different domain -- argues for a 'bottom-up' construction of phenomena from data without the involvement of theory. I criticise Bogen and Woodward's account by analysing their melting point of lead example in depth, which is usually cited in the literature to illustrate the data/phenomenon distinction. Yet, the main focus of this paper lies on Matthias Kaiser's (1995) case study of the plate tectonic revolution, the most extensive case study that has been put forth to support the bottom-up construction of phenomena. On the basis of new historical evidence, which has been overlooked not only by Kaiser but also by the entire historical literature on the plate tectonic revolution, I demonstrate that phenomena are not constructed from the bottom-up but rather, admittedly counter-intuitively, from the top-down. Author Affiliation: Division of History and Philosophy of Science, School of Philosophy, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK Article History: Received 21 March 2006; Revised 23 August 2006 Article Note: (dedication) This article is dedicated to Lawrence Morley