Channel
@chogrbe
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
2,241subscribers
+74 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002165781965 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @chogrbe |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 14 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/chogrbe |
Science — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 16 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Sept 2026, 06:58 | 2,241 | -3 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 21:58 | 2,244 | -7 |
| 7 Sept 2026, 07:38 | 2,251 | -1 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 18:59 | 2,252 | -7 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 17:18 | 2,259 | +11 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 08:42 | 2,248 | +10 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 06:45 | 2,238 | -9 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 15:05 | 2,247 | +26 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 12:45 | 2,221 | +35 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 01:42 | 2,186 | +14 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 03:17 | 2,172 | +6 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 11:38 | 2,166 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 15:31 | 2,167 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 15:26 | 2,167 | first reading |
18 posts held, back to 29 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 18 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
189 reactions across 17 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 63.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 120 | 63.5% | |
| 😱 | 29 | 15.3% | |
| ❤ | 17 | 8.99% | |
| 🙏 | 14 | 7.41% | |
| 👀 | 4 | 2.12% | |
| 👏 | 3 | 1.59% | |
| 🫡 | 2 | 1.06% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 17 of the 18 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 189 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 18 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 7 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
As I stated often, stronger earthquakes tend to cluster in time, aka "temporal clustering". After 8 days two M 6.3 tremors hit within 3 hours on the 5th where we anticipated stronger seismic activity. The situation with Earth between Venus and Neptune remains critical.
#earthquake M 6.3 SOUTH OF KERMADEC ISLANDS
👍6🙏1
Obvious seismic increase with 2x M 6.3 tremors within 3.5 hours.
👍7
#earthquake M 6.3 MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES
🙏5👍3😱3
Mathematics and astronomy are as old as civilization. We can study the sky and calculate where the planets and the Moon are centuries into the past and future. This way we can research correlations with seismic activity. A recent peer-reviewed paper from Moroccan scientists confirmed this influence of the planets and our own years long research has confirmed this. Those who do not do the observational research may s…
❤7👍7🫡2
Larger earthquakes can be preceded by precursor activity, but they can also strike out of the blue. Except for moderate ~M 5 events, recent days have been very quiet overall (no M≥5.5).
👍10😱3❤1
This study is unique. To my knowledge it has not been done before, and it gives a unique insight into the relationship between the largest earthquakes and the lunar phases. Take your time. It will blow your mind. It also debunks "super moon" myths. https://github.com/ssgeos/great-earthquakes-lunar-phase-statistics
👍8🙏4❤1
The repo has been updated with all M ≥ 8.5 events from the GEM-GHEC catalog and a peer-reviewed paper (->1361). With this update the p-value dropped from 0.028 to 0.008. Stats regarding phase preference were also added, showing an obvious preference for Full Moons. https://github.com/ssgeos/great-earthquakes-lunar-phase-statistics
👍7🙏4
The #earthquake in #Egypt has been revised to mb 5.2. It may be revised further in the coming days after more data has been reviewed.
👍8❤1
Felt #earthquake M 4.7 EGYPT
👍6👀4😱4
#earthquake M 5.6 NORTH OF ASCENSION ISLAND
👍6😱3
There's been a notable seismic uptick in New Zealand in the last two weeks: M 5.9 - M 5.7 - M 5.6.
👍7😱2
Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @chogrbe. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 15 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Frank Hoogerbeets” (@chogrbe), 2,241 subscribers as measured 15 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/chogrbe.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.