Part 1: You are surprised by your findings.
Part 2: You are double-checking references by authors rather than taking them at their word.
Now, for number 3. I usually do not bother reading a lot of blogs but on my twitter feed, I have seen several posts by one Stephan Huller on Clement of Alexandria. To say the least, the posts and the titles of said posts read more like Page 6 of the New York Post.
In my research on Clement, I don’t ever believe I came across one scholar who tried to claim that Clement had a close relationship with St. Mark. Yes, Clement did use the Secret Gospel of Mark, but you know what, he also quote Greek and Roman tragedies? Does that mean he was a playwright as well? The funny part about all of this, Huller’s scholarship on Clement o A is much more like the T.V. show Seinfield, it’s the show about nothing. How many times do you have to go over the same passages in Eusebius without referring to any texts written by Clement himself? You are not “myth-making”; myths in many cases, can guide us into truth. Sounding much more like Christian Reconstructionist historian David Barton, where every historian prior to him is “misguided,” Huller is just using his interpretation of Eusebius to put forth a weird conspiracy theory pertaining to the Gospel of Mark.
The relationship between Clement and Origen of Alexandria are superfluous, and really of no concern to me; as I have argued before, the time frames for Clement and Origen are uncertain, and because their teaching differ, at least in my reading, I choose not to place them in the same category.
Is there anything that proves Clement himself was living in Alexandria?
Let’s see, well, in his writings he refers to the temples of Isis, the Egyptian religions, and he relies on the work of Philo of Alexandria. So, I think it would be a little important for him to be teaching to his audience, wouldn’t that make a little sense? His works do not fall from the sky, and neither did an angel hand him a scroll. No, see, Clement’s Logos Christology comes in the historical context of Roman Egypt, where the folk spoke Greek, and the Jews were persecuted, not being able to become full citizens. In fact, in Clement’s Sermon/Exhortation to the Greeks, he suggests that the Hellenized Egyptian deities are really demons. Why else would he say that unless he had an audience who were located in Egypt?
The lesson we should learn here, how can one tell if you are doing CRITICAL scholarship, as opposed to pushing an agenda or conspiracy theory, is by acknowledging our own limitations. In Huller’s last few post on CoA, it sounded like Huller knows the man personally as if he shook Clement’s hands just the other day. You are free to believe what you want as well as “research” what you want, but freedom outside of any notion of truth or beauty or good is untruth, a lie.
(Other examples can be seen 
